Slashdot Mirror
Dealing With a Copyright Takedown Request?
George Maschke writes "I recently received a takedown notice from a corporate lawyer demanding that I remove a post on my Web site's message board. It purportedly lists the first 75 of 567 questions on the MMPI-2 paper-and-pencil psychological test. It seems to me that such posting of a limited amount copyrighted material for discussion purposes on a public-interest, non-profit Web site falls within the scope of the fair use exemption of US copyright law. I have thus declined to remove the post. I believe that the corporation in question is seeking to chill public discussion of its test, which applicants for employment with many governmental agencies are required to complete. I would be interested in this community's thoughts on the matter."
This post is temporarily unavailable due to a DMCA takedown notice received by our web hosting company's bandwidth provider. We have sent our service provider a counter-notice and plan to have the original content of this post back up no later than 6 April 2009.
Ah, looking forward to the /. dupe.
can you contest it and leave it up until a ruling is made by a court?
"Ubuntu" -- an African word, meaning "Slackware is too hard for me". - stolen from Dan C alt.os.linux.slackware
Which implies guilt.
You have a third option, you know: growing a pair.
I'm sure most people will agree that what you've done falls well within the realm of fair use. But you know very well that you're going to need to talk to legal counsel with expertise in copyright matters, and that means money. Maybe someone with contacts in the Electronic Frontier Foundation could give you a hand. Sometimes having a lawyer responding to the guy making the threat is enough to make them back down.
The world's burning. Moped Jesus spotted on I50. Details at 11.
This post is temporarily unavailable due to a DMCA takedown notice received by our web hosting company's bandwidth provider. We have sent our service provider a counter-notice and plan to have the original content of this post back up no later than 6 April 2009.
Looks like you caved in and took it down for now.
Hi, I'm not a lawyer nor are many people you're likely to see posting here.
But that percentage sounds like it may just cross the line for fair use, or perhaps even editorial comment. If you are going to go against the wishes of a larger entity, be sure of the percentage that might cross a line and trim to that. It may not be necessary to remove if you can editorialize.
Otherwise, I hope you run the website through an LLC.
"There is more worth loving than we have strength to love." - Brian Jay Stanley
This is a particular case, given that it is dealing with a psychological test. In many or most cases these rely on the test-taker not knowing the exact questions ahead of time. As you're dealing with over 10% of the test here, it's not all that far-fetched to say that foreknowledge of these questions could skew the results in a statistically significant way. This would count as causing harm or devaluing the original work (by causing prospective clients [the government] to doubt its results), which are direct reasons for fair use not to apply. Of course, IANAL and you should seek one, etc, but it seems to me that this is not that unreasonable a claim. A single question? Sure. 75 of them? Probably not so much.
Stuff.
Ask a lawyer, not Slashdot.
Fascism starts when the efficiency of the government becomes more important than the rights of the people.
Why do all of the Ask Slashdot questions boil down to: "I want free legal advice. Give me an opinion on x."
My thought is that you should really ask a lawyer what to do. Sheesh, do you really want free legal advice from random people with lots of free time on their hands?
...not a bunch of random strangers!
Everything you read here, however sensible it may sound, is just noise. Case law matters. Statues matter. Public opinion, common sense, logic and reasonableness do not matter.
Blasphemy is a human right. Blasphemophobia kills.
I have a soft spot for messing with the MMPI. Way, way back one of the first programs I ever touched was an MMPI for an Apple II. I um, altered it slightly so that everyone was a tad more paranoid. You have to screw with the MMPI... a program that determines mental health.. why, it almost makes me feel sane to think about it!
This is my sig.
Go immediately to http://www.chillingeffects.org/
And the use can't reduce the copyright holder's ability to commercially exploit the work. It sounds like you're violating both.
IANAL, but not on the first date.
You've already received a formal takedown notice from a genuine lawyer; you need to consult a lawyer of your own. ASAP. The Slashdot community's thoughts may well be interesting/insightful/flamebait/overrated, but they're no substitute for trained legal counsel.
Look up your local bar and see if you can find an IP lawyer with reasonable rates for a consultation. Failing that, contact the Electronic Frontier Foundation; perhaps they can help, or at least point you in the right direction.
One of the stipulations of the fair use clause of the copyright act is:
the effect of the use upon the potential market for or value of the copyrighted work.
I'm not sure what the test is for, but I can certainly see how posting any of the questions of a test, wherein the questions aren't already known, greatly decreases it's value in the eyes of test givers.
From your website, it appears that you are in the Netherlands. This will completely change the answer to your question. And yet you don't even mention it. I'll echo the other posters and say "Ask a Dutch lawyer."
Was it certified? Can they prove they sent it?
I want to delete my account but Slashdot doesn't allow it.
Still cached here at the moment: http://bit.ly/b14Bx
At least until the lawyers notice and take a number in the long line of people trying to get things out of Google's cache.
In 1976 I worked for a clinic that had those tests. I heard that only the first 75 (more or less) were counted in the real score. All the rest were just filler.
If that is true, your position is much weaker.
(I am not a psychoanalyst)
Your choice is pretty simple:
1) Take it down, or
2) Deal with their lawyers.
Since you are asking Slashdot, you don't have a lawyer, or you wouldn't need the reams of idiocy you'll find as a response**. They didn't mention the DMCA, which would at least allow you to defer the problem to the original poster. (who could ask to have it put back up after you notify them)
You got nothing. So, take it down, and resist the urge to post it to wikileaks while enjoying a $0.75 cup of coffee at a local coffee shop with Wifi because that might be considered (ahem) copyright infringement... how long you resist that urge is up to you.
Some fights are worth fighting. It's rarely worth fighting a fight you have no resources to win. Pearson is a big, big, big uber-ultra teh evil mega-corporation, but this is unlikely to be controversial enough to benefit from the Streissand Effect.
You have much better things to worry about.
** Feel free to consider this post idiotic
I have no problem with your religion until you decide it's reason to deprive others of the truth.
You believe they are trying to prevent public discussion of their test material. They claim you are hurting their business interests.
If you think they might be lying, you could ask them to take a polygraph test. Oh....yeah, sorry.
THL phish sticks
Sorry, but 13% of the content is not "limited". If I reprint 85 pages of "Harry Potter and the Half-Blood Prince", would you consider that a "limited amount"? I don't think the publisher would... Not to mention you say "the first 75"... If it had been a 'random' 75, with commentary and discussion for each one; that would be one thing. Even then, it would be dubious. Even if I split it into one-paragraph sections, with commentary and discussion between each paragraph, 85 pages worth of Harry Potter would be difficult to claim under fair use.
For example, the usage of 400 words out of a 500 page book was considered infringement: Harper Row vs. Nation Enterprises.
Now, according to the wonderful DMCA, if you take the material down now, *YOU* are safe from prosecution. If you present the user of your board the opportunity to protest, then if they want to put it back up, *THEY* become the responsible party.
I just looked at (a cache of) your site and you are fucked.
It's just posted for all to see. There's NOTHING in the post other than the questions. There may be discussion around it, but I doubt the ends justify the means in this case.
http://74.125.95.132/search?q=cache%3Ahttps%3A%2F%2Fantipolygraph.org%2Fcgi-bin%2Fforums%2FYaBB.pl%3Faction%3Dprint%3Bnum%3D1109032158&submit2=Google
The reason you need a lawyer is there is no bright line test for fair use, and you're getting a lot of bad advice from the people who start with IANAL. Fair use is decided on four main factors, and the law is all over the place (and judge dependent).
"there are no absolute rules as to how much of a copyrighted work may be copied and still be considered fair use" (Maxtone-Graham v. Burtchaell, 803 F.2d at 1263).
Check out Stanford's fair use examples page to get an idea of what you're looking at:
http://fairuse.stanford.edu/Copyright_and_Fair_Use_Overview/chapter9/9-c.html
The Betamax case (Sony v. Universal) allowed copying of the entire copyrighted work under fair use, while Harper & Row denied fair use for using 300 words of Gerald Ford's 200,000 word manuscript.
You need to talk to a lawyer, not the crowd on /. Don't listen to anyone who says 300 words are ok, non-commercial use is ok, etc. Those are all factors, but not definitive.
It's scary any time you try to exercise your right to fair use. The problem is that the definition is vague, and you'll never know if you're okay until someone sues you and you get your day in court -- which you really don't want to happen.
I can predict that a lot of slashdotters will say, "Don't ask for legal advice on Ask Slashdot -- we're not lawyers!" Well, yeah, but obviously the OP can't afford to get a lawyer to take care of this, and the chilling effect he refers to in his post comes from the fact that he, unlike the publisher of the test, can't afford a lawyer.
If you take a look at the Wikipedia article on fair use, it lays out four criteria, and unfortunately they're kind of vague. However, you're good as far as noncommercial use, the factual nature of the work, the limited portion used, and the effect on market value. Sounds like all systems are go. Except that you don't want to be hauled into court so that you can make that argument.
Personality tests are bullshit. On an intellectual test like the SAT, the contents are things that everyone can pretty much agree on the face of it are reasonable. That is, in the language of standardized testing, the items have good "face validity." You don't need to disclose what's on this year's test in order to get some idea of what kind of items are on the test. On a personality test, there's no way to independently verify that the test has any scientific validity without disclosing at least a few of the items. For that reason, I think it's great that you're pushing your fair use rights here.
One thing to realize is that this is not a DMCA takedown notice, and they haven't specifically threatened to sue you. Another thing to realize is that in the US, you can be sued for damages beyond actual damages, provided that they've filed a copyright form, which they undoubtedly have. (Copyright is awarded automatically when you create the work, but unless you file the form you can only sue infringers for actual damages, which are often zero.)
Good luck!
Find free books.
Saves a lot of time that way.
Peer1.com seems to be under the impression that once a DMCA takedown notice is received, the material mentioned in the notice must be removed for a period of 14 days, after which, if the complainant does not provide notification that it has sought a court order, the material may be restored. However, my understanding is that the material may be placed back on-line (PDF) promptly upon the service provider's receipt of a counter-claim (which I have already sent), that is, there is no need to wait 14 days.
It's also worth noting that Pearson, the copyright holder of the MMPI-2, filed a takedown notice for the very same post in 2007. We promptly filed a counter-notice, Pearson took no further action, and we thought the matter resolved. Has anyone had a problem with a copyright holder filing repeated DMCA takedown notices to one's service provider for the same material?
George W. Maschke
AntiPolygraph.org
Some of the questions are also phrased in the past tense; I would expect this to be corrected (e.g. "was or is") on a professional psychological profile survey.
I wonder if this was either fabricated, or simply recreated from someone's memory of the questions. (Possibly the latter, assuming that the complainants and/or the lawyers sending the takedown message did in fact read the original survey as well as the contents of the post in question...)
Paleotechnologist and connoisseur of pretty shiny things.
The thing I do remember, very clearly, is her comments on "fair use." She said that "fair use" is hardly ever what we think it is. It is not what is fair. It is not what we want it to be. It is only what the courts have specifically defined it to be. In most cases, things we think are fair use have never been tested by the courts. How the courts would decide if they did hear the case, I would not try to predict.
Unless you can find a legal precedent where the issue you are dealing with has been clearly tested and declared by a court of law to be fair use, do not assume it is. If there are no precedents showing that what you are doing is a violation of copyright, then the other lawyers can also not assume they will prevail.
If you want to be the one to test this in court, more power to you.
The posted cache from Google shows that the offending post was made back in 2005! It obviously isn't that important to anyone that might care about it or you think that they might have someone crawling the web just a bit better to try and find things like this.
the person taking them is unfamiliar with the concept. Pearson is definitely attempting to chill public discussion on the MMPI to prevent information on how to manipulate the test from becoming widespread. Interestingly enough, MMPI scores try to determine if the test-taker wasn't completely honest on the test. If the information on how to fake out the MMPI became widespread, there would be little point in administering the test. Same goes for many psychological tests (e.g. Raven's or Wechsler, perhaps even the IAT or DRM word lists) - they're only valid if the person taking the test is naive to the contents.
If you're trying to fake out the test, a few old items probably won't help you much. The Pearson lawyers are just being proactive, trying to prevent someone from posting the whole thing.
There's something to be said for the public right to know about how government evaluates potential employees or does business in general, but there are also clear exceptions to that, e.g. military secrets. Knowing what the MMPI is and what it does likely fall under the 'right to know' umbrella; gaining that knowledge doesn't require public access to the testing manual, the publication of which would defeat the purpose of administering the test in the first place.
IANAL, but that's way, way too high a percentage of the questions for anything a reasonable person might consider 'fair use'. Take it down, put up, say, 5 questions if you really feel the need.
And, yeah, ask a real lawyer, not /.
You couldn't. 10% is the limit.
I had to Google exact lines from this to convince myself it was real. Some of these questions, I'd feel crazy answering at all. I mean, seriously... "My hands and feet are usually warm enough"? Uh, sure, I guess, during the summer at least. If not, I wear a second pair of socks...?
Honestly, I don't see how they can be worried about copyright infringement, as the questions seem exceedingly simple. The real trick, I'm sure, is in interpreting the answers.
I don't think you can copyright voodoo (MMPI2).
TRUE OR FALSE (567 QUESTIONS)
1.I like mechanics magazines
2.I have a good appetite
3.I wake up fresh & rested most mornings
4.I think I would like the work of a librarian
5.I am easily awakened by noise
6.I like to read newspaper articles on crime
7.My hands and feet are usually warm enough
8.My daily life is full of things that keep me interested
9.I am about as able to work as I ever was
10.There seems to be a lump in my throat much of the time
11.A person should try to understand his dreams and be guided by or take warning from them
12.I enjoy detective or mystery stories
13.I work under a great deal of tension
14.I have diarrhea once a month or more
15.Once in a while I think of things too bad to talk about
16.I am sure I get a raw deal from life
17.My father was a good man
18.I am very seldom troubled by constipation
19.When I take a new, I like to be tipped off on whom should be gotten next to
20.My sex life is satisfactory
21.At times I have very much wanted to leave home
22.At times I have fits of laughing & crying that I cannot control
23.I am troubled by attacks of nausea and vomiting
24.No one seems to understand me
25.I would like to be a singer
26.I feel that it is certainly best to keep my mouth shut when Iâ(TM)m in trouble
27.Evil spirits possess me at times
28.When someone does me a wrong I feel I should pay him back if I can, just for the principle of the thing.
29.I am bothered by acid stomach several times a week
30.At times I feel like swearing
31.I have nightmares every few nights
32.I find it hard to keep my mind on a task or job
33.I have had very peculiar and strange experiences
34.I have a cough most of the time
35.If people had not had it in for me I would have been much more successful
36.I seldom worry about my heath
37.I have never been in trouble because of my sex behavior
38.During one period when I was a youngster I engaged in petty thievery
39.At times I feel like smashing things
40.Most any time I would rather sit and daydream than to do anything else
41.I have had periods of days, weeks, or months when I couldnâ(TM)t take care of things because I couldnâ(TM)t âoeget goingâ
42.My family does not like the work I have chosen ( or the work I intend to choose for my life work)
43.My sleep is fitful and disturbed
44.Much of the time my head seems to hurt all over
45.I do not always tell the truth
46.My judgment is better than it ever was
47.Once a week or oftener I feel suddenly hot all over without apparent cause
48.When I am with people I am bothered by hearing very queer things
49.It would be better if almost all laws were thrown away
50.My soul sometimes leaves my body
51.I am in just as good physical health as most of my friends
52.I prefer to pass by school friends, or people I know but have not seen for a long time, unless they speak to me first
53.A minister can cure disease by praying and putting his hand on your head
54.I am liked by most people who know me
55.I am almost never bothered by pains over the heart or in my chest
56.As a youngster I was suspended from school one or more times for cutting up
57.I am a good mixer
58.Everything is turning out just like the prophets of the Bible said it would
59.I have often had to take orders from someone who did not know as much as I did
60.I do not read every editorial in the newspaper everyday
61.I have not lived the right kind of life
62.Parts of my body often have feeling like burning, tingling, crawling, or like âoegoing to sleepâ
63.I have had no difficulty in starting or holding my bowel movement
64.I sometimes keep
Wha arr yoo taalkn about? I wenn down ta tha bar an they had sum greeaat I.P.A.s an Lagers for reasonububle prices. Zactly whaat he tol me to find. An NO I don hab a drinkn problem.
MMPI 2 TEST QUESTIONS IN ORDER
TRUE OR FALSE (567 QUESTIONS)
1.I like mechanics magazines
2.I have a good appetite
3.I wake up fresh & rested most mornings
4.I think I would like the work of a librarian
5.I am easily awakened by noise
6.I like to read newspaper articles on crime
7.My hands and feet are usually warm enough
8.My daily life is full of things that keep me interested
9.I am about as able to work as I ever was
10.There seems to be a lump in my throat much of the time
11.A person should try to understand his dreams and be guided by or take warning from them
12.I enjoy detective or mystery stories
13.I work under a great deal of tension
14.I have diarrhea once a month or more
15.Once in a while I think of things too bad to talk about
16.I am sure I get a raw deal from life
17.My father was a good man
18.I am very seldom troubled by constipation
19.When I take a new, I like to be tipped off on whom should be gotten next to
20.My sex life is satisfactory
21.At times I have very much wanted to leave home
22.At times I have fits of laughing & crying that I cannot control
23.I am troubled by attacks of nausea and vomiting
24.No one seems to understand me
25.I would like to be a singer
26.I feel that it is certainly best to keep my mouth shut when Iâ(TM)m in trouble
27.Evil spirits possess me at times
28.When someone does me a wrong I feel I should pay him back if I can, just for the principle of the thing.
29.I am bothered by acid stomach several times a week
30.At times I feel like swearing
31.I have nightmares every few nights
32.I find it hard to keep my mind on a task or job
33.I have had very peculiar and strange experiences
34.I have a cough most of the time
35.If people had not had it in for me I would have been much more successful
36.I seldom worry about my heath
37.I have never been in trouble because of my sex behavior
38.During one period when I was a youngster I engaged in petty thievery
39.At times I feel like smashing things
40.Most any time I would rather sit and daydream than to do anything else
41.I have had periods of days, weeks, or months when I couldnâ(TM)t take care of things because I couldnâ(TM)t âoeget goingâ
42.My family does not like the work I have chosen ( or the work I intend to choose for my life work)
43.My sleep is fitful and disturbed
44.Much of the time my head seems to hurt all over
45.I do not always tell the truth
46.My judgment is better than it ever was
47.Once a week or oftener I feel suddenly hot all over without apparent cause
48.When I am with people I am bothered by hearing very queer things
49.It would be better if almost all laws were thrown away
50.My soul sometimes leaves my body
51.I am in just as good physical health as most of my friends
52.I prefer to pass by school friends, or people I know but have not seen for a long time, unless they speak to me first
53.A minister can cure disease by praying and putting his hand on your head
54.I am liked by most people who know me
55.I am almost never bothered by pains over the heart or in my chest
56.As a youngster I was suspended from school one or more times for cutting up
57.I am a good mixer
58.Everything is turning out just like the prophets of the Bible said it would
59.I have often had to take orders from someone who did not know as much as I did
60.I do not read every editorial in the newspaper everyday
61.I have not lived the right kind of life
62.Parts of my body often have feeling like burning, tingling, crawling, or like âoegoing to sleepâ
63.I have had no difficulty in starting or holding my bowel movement
64.I sometimes keep on at a thing until others lose their patience with me
65.I loved my father
66.I see things or animals or people around me that others do not see
67.I wish I could be as happy as others seem to be
68.I hardly ever feel pain in the back of
would be okay, but 75 questions in order? Hogwash.
Now personally, I think most of these questions are vague, subject to interpretation, and otherwise useless for any assessment of one's personality.
But that's me.
Perhaps that says something about me, but then again, I do recall a california court ruling that some of these questions were invalid for some reason.
Some years ago, a copyright cost only $25 -- real cheap!
Ideas can't be copyrighted!
Ignore the Fools!
Better yet, a little snooping mught turn up their mug-shots and addresses.
A Google Maps search would then find the Perps where-abouts.
Then, a "stake Out."
At some point in time, oppourtinity will present itself.
A count, one-onethousand, two-onethousand, three-onethousand, squeeze trigger.
Repeat count and squeeze trigger.
Again, until all the Perps fall dead.
This is the solution: A .308 in the Brain.
This is how to solve the "nasty bonuses" at AIG, Goldman Sachs, Morgan Stanly and others.
A .308 in the Brain of the Perps ... with Google Maps, you're their!
What a wonderful Sniper Tool!
So Efficient!
So Economical!
I'd bump the number of questions posted into the low 30s. I would say 13% is more than limited.
Or, you could find a lawyer, and get an answer in a few minutes. Even if the lawyer charges several hundred bucks an hour, if it is quick, the cost should be small. Just have all your stuff ready.
post the posting and the threat of legal action in various forums know to be frequented by lawyers. ask them "do you think I should get a lawyer on this?"
putting the 'B' in LGBTQ+
My very favorite moment of the recent Battlestar Galactica finale was when Adama said "frakk this" and walked out of the polygraph test.
Take the cheese to sickbay, the doctor should see it as soon as possible - B'Elanna Torres, "Learning Curve"
If you want to fight it, you and your layers need to come up with a good reason that you need to redistribute so large a percentage of a a test as "fair use."
Google's cache still has the content.
Test makers are notoriously vicious in the defense of their property. Psychological tests especially, since it cost them a lot of money to create those items and test their reliability and validity, and they will have to replace those items if they are disclosed to enough people.
Granted, projective tests like the MMPI are generally garbage that don't tell you anything you can't figure out yourself with a little introspection, but publicly airing their items directly costs them money. Anyone that was awake in psych 101 knows how "useful" a person's MMPI personality type is, but that doesn't stop it from being one of the most popular go-to personality assessments.
Pearson in particular is a very large test maker with very hungry lawyers. They WILL sue you for this. They'll sue you for selling any of their products on ebay, too... even if it's just a xeroxed BLANK assessment protocol (the paper that the taker writes answers on). They'll sue you for talking about their items in a way that reveals items. They'll sue you at the drop of a hat.
Disclaimer: As a School Psychology student myself, most of our texts don't even use actual items from tests as examples. Tests themselves (and the protocols that go with them) are kept under lock and key, and cost a fortune.
you'd be better off seeking the advice of SWIAL, before you tell them to bugger off.
Sig this!
You are posting 75 questions of a 567 question exam. That is 13+% of the test. Perhaps you believe that posting 13% of their information is fair use, but that seems like a fairly large portion of the actual test to claim fair use. I'm sorry, but I see their point. Is it really necessary to post the actual questions verbatim? Perhaps you could paraphrase the questions.
check it out - here's a site with a (supposed) list of all the questions from both versions:
http://mmpi.baywords.com/
You know you've seen Blade Runner too many times if you imagine Leon saying
"Hey! I'll tell you about my black, tarry bowel movements"
[Gunfire and screams]
echo -e 'global _start\n _start:\n mov eax, 2\n int 80h\n jmp _start' > a.asm; nasm a.asm -f elf; ld a.o -o a;
You also have the choice of just ignoring the windbags. It's called "taking your chances".
How we know is more important than what we know.
That question, and the ones like it are to see if you are a hypochondriac
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Minnesota_Multiphasic_Personality_Inventory#Clinical_scales
Number Abbreviation Description What is Measured
1 Hs Hypochondriasis Concern with bodily symptoms
The answer is no presumably.
echo -e 'global _start\n _start:\n mov eax, 2\n int 80h\n jmp _start' > a.asm; nasm a.asm -f elf; ld a.o -o a;
He's explicitly asking for "community's thoughts on the matter". So please give him a break, stop your IANAL bashing. Here you go, a community advise.
Obediently take it down, send them a thank you note for notifying you of the matters and you're taking their feedback seriously.
Then open at least 10 blogs with your fake identities, and publicize the matter along with the entire taken down posts, with detail description of the case, tell the world WHAT A BUNCH OF FUCKTARDS THESE CORPORATE LEECHES ARE. To make sure they are better served, return to your message boards by other fake identities and post the links to those blogs with title "KISS MY SHINY ASS (COMPANY NAME HERE)!".
Just my humble community opinion.
Nobody here is unbiased. Get a lawyer.
However, note that posting over 10% of the content will rarely fall under Fair Use.
Any sufficiently advanced technology is indistinguishable from a rigged demo.
Okay, so you've posted the story to slashdot. That's the most important part. Next release it on wikileaks (might as well post the whole thing rather than just an excerpt) and post a link as Anonymous Coward. Voila! Streisand effect + subversive distribution!
I noticed several posts pointing out some of the seemingly silly questions (ie "My hands and feet get cold"). They may in fact be silly but there is reasoning behind them. I went and actually did some reading up on how the test is supposed to work. There are 8 different major scales measured and several other more minor ones too. For example Scale 1 is essentially looking at Hypochondria, a person's tendency to be really focused on (and maybe whiny) about every little ache and pain. The test understands that everyone has some stuff wrong with them and certain physical peeves too, so you're supposed to mark some of the stuff "T". But if you look at the questions, there are a bunch about this physical stuff and they are all over the place. If you put a "T" by a whole lot of them, then the test scores you higher on this scale. If you put an "F" by all of them, the test basically scores your "truthfulness on test questions" lower because these are things that everyone should complain about a few of.
The issue of test validity is a big deal and dealt with in different ways including checking for truthfulness by asking the same thing in a different way in different parts of the test. There are a bunch of these question pairs and there are some set up for consistent answers being "T/T", "T/F", and "F/F". There are also question sequences in the back half of the test designed to detect if the user is just starting to mostly randomly check or barely skim questions. Too high on this and the test is reflected as invalid.
Gaming the test is not as easy as it might seem at first glance. Some questions can be taken at face value, like "I sometimes think about killing myself". If you check that one "T" along with some other similar questions then you may well be suicidal. However, there are other questions that state mildly negative personality traits that most people have. If you refuse to admit to any of them then the test scores you as either trying to present an unrealistically positive image or as having an unrealistic self-image/ego. Answering some of those type questions with a "T" will get the test to paint you as a self-confident personality with a healthy self-image that feels no need to hide common human foibles.
Personally, I'm a skeptic of these kinds of tests. I think they may work to some degree in some scenarios with some people but there will be other scenarios or people for which the test will largely fail. This particular test is also susceptible to interpretation error. Some evaluators tend to focus in on individual scales but what I read says that that over-simple approach almost always yields skewed results. To get an accurate scoring the evaluator must consider the scales together. In large scale testing of different populations, the experts in this claim to have identified different groupings, for example two particular scales elevated while a third specific scale is lowered may represent a certain personality trait (ie rebelliousness or conformity). It's also said that the evaluator *must* have accurate background info on the subject (ie record of physical violence, manic behavior, etc). These factors can apparently change the assessment significantly.
I stop right on question 2. Do I think I have a good appetite? Do they want to convince people to admit that they eat too much (often the connotation behind "good appetite")? conversely, If one were to answer false, are they admitting to being anorexic? I'm guessing that "true" is the "correct" choice, but it really depends on what the examiner wants to know.
These questions (and ones like them) are written by psychologists for people who are too dumb to think about the questions being put to them. True and False simply doesn't give you enough data to go on. It doesn't even give you enough to know that the test taker understands what is being asked of them. A lot of these questions simply cannot be answered true or false by everyone. It's been a long time since I've taken one of these pre-employment nightmares. It's a real pity that they're sometimes substituted for an initial interview. I'll answer honestly, but as long as I have to guess what it is you're really asking, you're not going to get a reliable response.
Next, somebody is bound to say that I'm not the type of person the test is designed for. What? Is the test not designed to be given to a random job applicant, regardless of the type of person they are? Don't these so-called professionals comprehend that? Of course not. I think this is a pseudo-science that has attached itself to psychology.
Many of those are simply not anybody else's business. Some of these may be designed to weed out religious nut-jobs, but are downright insulting to the rest of us (religiously inclined). Some of these things should be discussed with a medical doctor, and not an employment test. This is no substitute for a physical. At least one question seems to test if you're libertarian. One asks if you're homosexual.
The take-down notice seems to give legitimacy to this list. Still, I have a hard time believing anyone could get away with this in an employment scenario.
I won't join Slashcott. OTOH, If Beta goes live, I just won't be back until it's fixed. Sorry Dice.
It is probably to "get you on record" with the correct answer.. so they can use it against you later if need be.
These guys can be very, very helpful about issues like this:
http://www.eff.org/
I've calculated my velocity with such exquisite precision that I have no idea where I am.
The site, and it's owner are both located outside the US.
So i guess the real question is, is the DMCA even valid outside the US ?
And can it be enforced outside the US ?
I can't see how anyone could deem 800 words/75 sentences presented without being broken up for analysis as possibly being fair use. Even if it's a 'small' percentage of the main text.
IANAL but I do know that if I used anywhere near that amount of solid text quoted in a university paper, it would have been rejected for plagiarism and I would have risked expulsion depending on how it was used.
...Just take it down from your site, post it somewhere where US lawyers can't touch it (Wikileaks, foreign hosting provider) something like that and just reference it from their site.
They can't prove you posted it to those sites and there's certainly nothing illegal in linking to it.
This will a) Allow discussion to continue, and b) Wind the lawyers and company up no end as they'll be powerless to act.
America doesn't own the internet, whilst these types of notices are frustrating they only work whilst you're a US citizen, using US hosting and where the posting can be linked back to you. US hosting is the weak link because most ISPs/Host that receive the notice will take it down regardless of what you want to do so I'd eliminate that first. Host abroad, host without any personal link to you on the site and there's jack all they can do using US take down notices and a lot of countries don't have anything similar, they'd have to take it all the way to court in most foreign countries to take action there and that's assuming you're not using hosting in a country like Sweden or just posting it on Wikileaks where such a site actually has constitutional protection.
Just post the whole lot on Wikileaks.
Such a test would be rather illegal in the UK, and probably much of the EU.
20.My sex life is satisfactory
69.I am very strongly attracted by members of my own sex
Both questions could count as sexual harassment. (Aside from the fact, most sane people would tell the questioner to fuck off and mind there own business)
14.I have diarrhea once a month or more
Surely questions about your health that are not job releted are illegal?
58.Everything is turning out just like the prophets of the Bible said it would
LOL ! Don't get me started on the legality of this one!
I'm honestly amazed these questions are considered acceptable.
Here, they WOULD bring the law crashing down on you.
Anyone quoted by a reporter knows how little they understand
Don't believe what you read is the truth.
It is just an extract, but really quite a large extract (13% of the "work"), and that's pretty much the content of the post. Just a huge segment of a copyrighted work. It's not even highlights. It's an extract.
Certainly the responses add a little context, but I'm not sure that's enough.
Written by a true schizophrenic. Your thoughts are disjointed, murderous, and furthermore, horrendously misspelled.
23.I am troubled by attacks of nausea and vomiting
27.Evil spirits possess me at times
50.My soul sometimes leaves my body
53.A minister can cure disease by praying and putting his hand on your head
whoa! sounds like the plot for The Exorcist !
4.I think I would like the work of a librarian
I bet somewhere down that list is :
xx. I like bananas
Go here and plagiarise.
"Welcome to our world. We are the wasted youth. And we are the future too." Yes, I know these are stupid lyrics.
1.) It's copyright by the University of Minnesota. Uptight Wankers !
2.) If it's a pre-requisite for a federal job, it should be issued by the Fed, and therefore in the public domain.
3.)You're foolish for not obeying the take-down notice.
4.)You're even more foolish if you don't immediately publish the entire document on Wikileaks.
Thanks for listening.
Its been posted on slashdot... i think this means it is now Public Domain.
Actually this reminds me of the kinda quizes that we gave to each other at school.
1) You ever kiss a girl
2) You ever put your hands down a girls pants.
3) You ever had sex with a girl.
Of course everyone flagrantly lied on these (after all we were about 12-14) but we all claimed to have done the most heinous things with girls (and the full list was usually around 100 questions relating to things you may have done with girls, animals, vegatables, and minerals.
Maybe something strange with my school though....
Seriously, did you even read the text you just quoted?
" (3) the amount and substantiality of the portion used in
relation to the copyrighted work as a whole; and
(4) the effect of the use upon the potential market for or value
of the copyrighted work."
Using 75 out of 567 is a substantial fraction of the whole. This might be more than you might casually get away with as an "excerpt".
Further, the MMPI is a "Personality Inventory" test... it may well be that the (alleged) effectiveness of the test relies on the test-taker to not know the questions beforehand. The test maker may therefore have a legitimate beef in regard to item (4).
Do not misunderstand me: according to my college psychology professor, tests such as MMPI and MMPI2 were thoroughly discredited many years ago. I question its worth from the beginning. But that does not mean that the copyright holder does not have a case.
he might not have the time (or want) to take on your case, but I have no doubt he is familiar with the relevant issues, and perhaps he could point you to someone who could help.
I think you're screwed.
If you wanted the protection of 'fair use' then you should select specific questions which demonstrate particular points, and make the whole thing part of a proper article e.g.
(Introduction about what these tests are used for and why they are contentious, then)
"There are quite a lot of questions which appear uncontentious and have only one 'reasonable' answer, such as"
(insert *a couple* of examples)
"However, the following type of question appears to be a 'damned if you do, damned if you don't' type question where either answer seems wrong and portrays you in a negative light"
(insert *a couple* of examples)
"Then you get on to the questions which would probably be illegal in many countries under anti-discrimination laws - and also raise the question 'why is this any of their business? what are they going to do with this information?'"
(insert *a couple* of examples)
etc. etc.
Then a conclusion and invitation to discuss.
I'm afraid you can in no way argue sucessfully for fair use just copying 75 questions verbatim. That is far beyond what is needed for discussion and criticism since many of the questions will illustrate almost exactly the same point. You're about as likely to get away with this as you are if you posted (or allowed the posting of and didn't remove) the entire first track or two off a 10 track CD - i.e. *not at all*.
Perfect! All we need now is a site on how to analyze the answers. Hehe.
Your question is a purely legal question. You should be addressing it to your company's lawyer. And you need to provide that lawyer with all the materials.
If 300 members of Slashdot tell you you're in the right, and they all get modded up to "+5", that doesn't mean you're in the clear.
Ray Beckerman +5 Insightful
From my non-lawyer perspective, my advice is to either get a lawyer and prepare to spend a lot of money on legal battles, or take it down and move on with your life. There are possibly lots of legal maneuvers you and your lawyer could employ, but is it worth a good chunk of your life and/or life savings?
At face value, the amount you've posted seems like a significant amount of the whole. My suspicion is that you would lose any court battle over it, barring some fantastic lawyering.
I couldn't resist posting the classic joke: "According to scientific studies, 80% of men masturbate, and 20% of men are liars."
A number of people received requests (to be followed by legal action) to remove US Federal Court decisions. These are decisions that have been REPORTED in the Federal Reporter (762 F.2d 1151 among others). The excuse was that they were too easy to find with Google whereas in F.2d they'd require work to find.
EEF was not interested (so far) in taking this on, but it is outrageous that any attorney would agree to send a letter asking to remove a Federal Court decision. And so far I've had 3 of them! These aren't copyright issues - the court decisions are not copyrightable (only the markups would be) - just someone who was a defendant not wanting it online.
The problem with the question asked here is that this is more a question of fact than anything - is 75/567 (about 13%) more than fair use allows? I am a lawyer and I don't know the answer. Certainly 90% would not be fair use. Certainly 1/567 would be fair use. The problem with non-objective standards like those in much of the law today is grey area such as this.
762 F.2d 1151
UNITED STATES of America, Appellee,
v.
Patrick MURPHY, Defendant, Appellant.
UNITED STATES of America, Appellee,
v.
Kevin W. DEYO, Defendant, Appellant.
UNITED STATES of America, Appellee,
v.
Steven J. QUINLIVAN, Defendant, Appellant.
Nos. 84-1599, 84-1600 and 84-1671.
United States Court of Appeals,
First Circuit.
Argued Jan. 7, 1985.
Decided June 3, 1985.
1
Seth M. Kalberg, Jr., Boston, Mass., for Steven J. Quinlivan.
2
Robert H. Astor, Northampton, Mass., for Patrick Murphy.
3
Stephen R. Kaplan, Northampton, Mass., with whom William St. James, Northampton, Mass., was on brief for Kevin W. Deyo.
4
Henry L. Rigali, Asst. U.S. Atty., Boston, Mass., with whom William F. Weld, U.S. Atty., Boston, Mass., was on brief for appellee.
5
Before COFFIN and ALDRICH, Circuit Judges, and GIGNOUX,* Senior District Judge.
6
GIGNOUX, Senior District Judge.
7
Defendants-appellants Patrick Murphy, Kevin W. Deyo, and Steven J. Quinlivan were named in a one-count indictment charging them with knowingly and intentionally using threats of serious bodily harm to influence the testimony of a witness in an official proceeding, in violation of 18 U.S.C. Sec. 1512(a)(1). After a joint jury trial in the United States District Court for the District of Massachusetts, all three defendants were convicted. On appeal, they charge numerous errors, of which we address only the allegation that the indictment lacked the specificity required to support the convictions. We reverse.
8
I.
9
The Background
10
The evidence at trial, viewed in the light most favorable to the government, United States v. Mora, 598 F.2d 682, 683 (1st Cir.1979), may be summarized as follows: Richard Watson was a drug informant in state and local police investigations in Franklin County, Massachusetts, from August 1983 through March 1984. During the same period, he also became an informant for the United States Drug Enforcement Administration (DEA) in the Springfield area. Acting as a state informant, Watson introduced many people, including the appellant Murphy and Karin Dumas-Murphy1 to an undercover state police officer, Kenneth Sullivan. Acting as a federal informant, he purchased cocaine from one Haythem Dawlett on several different occasions.
11
On March 9, 1984, Dawlett was arrested on federal charges of distributing cocaine. On the same date, apparently as a result of Watson's participation as an informant, between 32 and 35 suspects were arrested on state narcotics charges. On March 21, 1984, Watson testified before the federal grand jury in Springfield as a government witness in the Dawlett investigation.
12
Appellants and Dumas-Murphy were the subject of a separate DEA investigation of dilaudid distribution in Franklin County, which was being conducted about the same time as the foregoing federal Dawlett and state narcotics investigations. They were arrested on March 9 on fed
Bullshit. I'm not a lawyer and I give legal advice all the time, sometimes on things I'm barely competent to even talk about - just like many lawyers.
The legal profession should clean up their own mess, starting with an effective, accessible complaints process. The bar is a joke.
That, plus the leak to slashdot and the ensuing Streissand Effect, is more than sufficient.
He may have published 13% of the questions, but that's well under 10% of the total material related to the MMPI test - you need the scoring criteria as well. The questions, by themselves, are pretty much worthless, and you can be sure that the scoring criteria are longer than the test itself - otherwise, the test is even more bs than it seems.
So, since they already hand them out in such quantities (and they really do), there's no "trade secret". Anyone who has taken the test now has the "trade secret knowledge", and without a signed non-disclosure agreement to boot.
Tempest, meet teapot.
The questions themselves are a valid topic of discussion, especially when used in an employment context, where they are, in many areas, just plain illegal to ask.
It seems to me that such posting of a limited amount copyrighted material for discussion purposes on a public-interest, non-profit Web site falls within the scope of the fair use exemption of US copyright law.
Unless you are an attorney, judge or lawmaker, it really doesn't matter what the law "seems" to you. It seems to me that you are wrong on this one, even if it does suck.
My understanding of the DMCA is that filing a false notice is only perjury if it can be shown to have been done intentionally. Having a different opinion about what is fair use, no matter how stupid it is, is certainly not covered by that. Only a court can decide what is fair use, which is why it is a lousy way to protect the public's rights versus the copyright holder's rights.
To be guilty of perjury, the DA would have to show, for example, that you sent a notice about something on which it was clear you didn't even have rights, and that you knew that beforehand. AFAIK, this has never come to prosecution.
> People making false DMCA requests are simply idiots
If in your opinion all criminals are idiots, I agree. Otherwise, they are just gaming the system, so they might be better classified as "smart assholes", assuming they're doing a good job of gaming the system.
In dutch law it is called "citaat recht", not fair use. Check out the limit that was recently in in a lawsuit against jaap.nl. The limit was set on 155 words in te jaap.nl case.
IMHO (IANAL) your quote is beyond the point of citaat recht. The solution is simple: break up the large text and make several small quotes with relevant comments on each quote.
The MMPI isn't designed like that. The questions are marked according to sub-scales based on empirical data (not what the question looks like it is asking, as you imply). There is also a "lying" sub-scale -ie. the type of answers that people who were trying to make themselves look good chose. To cheat, you would have to answer questions the way a stable, productive person would, but not the way a lying person would.
"Knowledge is the only instrument of production that is not subject to diminishing returns" -Journal of Political Econom
My father was a lawyer for 35+ years.
His favorite Philosophy of Law he learned in the Marines:
No one can make you do anything, but they can sure make you wish you had.
Good luck with that.
Living in Chile
is sometimes a useful legal precedent.
So take this with the appropriate grain of salt, but I think you're probably wrong - that it likely does not constitute fair use. However, it depends upon the exact situation and since the content is not on your site at the moment it's impossible to say.
Some examples:
- Suppose it was simply list of those 75 questions with general commentary on all 75 questions, then I don't think that constitutes fair use. Whatever point was trying to be made could almost undoubtedly be made using fewer questions.
- Suppose that each question was posted with commentary on THAT PARTICULAR question, then that could constitute fair use assuming that the commentary for each question was sufficiently different. If the same commentary was offered for 10 different questions then it would not be fair use of all 10 questions.
By plugging the text of #66 and #67 into Goggle using quotes to get phrase matches:
1-75 plus some bogus ones
370 questsions of another version
1-75 plus 1-130 of the 370 version
(PDF) contains a sampling of about 100 randomly ordered questions
1-75
1-566 as VB .asp program source (!) and possibly with "preferred" answers
Enjoy your Streisand Effect!
#naabhaprzrag, #sverubfr-000, #agi-fcbafberq, negvpyr[pynff*=' negvpyr-ary-'] { qvfcynl: abar !vzcbegnag; }
Oh, the poster is a clever one.
He probably KNEW the answer: "Consult a Lawyer" or "Take it down" or "Put it on Wikileaks."
But what he wanted was to get the word out about the absurdity of the test itself.
And, thanks to Slashdot, we now know a little bit more about this stupid test, we now know what the first 75 questions are, we now know that the company that makes it are trying to keep it a secret, and we now know why they are.
In short, this was a hail-mary pass for the Streistand Effect that connected. Good play, sir!
I used to work for NetQoS. I no longer do, but want to keep the excellent karma attached to this account.
Do you, like me, also actively search out ethically marginal situations so you can be amused by the debate between the angel and devil which pop up on your shoulders?
The question you are asking is factual in nature, not legal, so it would be up to a jury to decide, should you get that far.
My opinion is that 75 questions is too many to be a fair use. If you had posted 10 questions for people to get the idea, that would probably be a fair use. However, 75 is enough questions to affect someone's score, so I would say you are violating the copyright.
In any event, if you do not take it down, right or wrong, you may have to spend money defending yourself. You should be asking, is leaving them up worth the money I may be spending on attorney's fees and court costs?
If you want to post a large part of a work, or the entirety of it, the right way to do it is to space your post over time, and make sure each post is independently "fair use."
Oh, and you have to hide the fact that it's you or your cohorts doing all the postings. Courts frown on gamesmanship, but allegations of gamesmanship have to be proven.
Example:
If you wanted to post the first 75 items, pick a handful of related items from the entire test and write up a commentary on them. Then, several weeks later, on another forum, do something similar. Just don't do the same thing, don't use the same writing style, don't use the same ISP, don't use the same handle, etc. etc. Even better if you are posting from out of town or via a proxy. Repeat this enough times and eventually all 75 questions will be online.
Or, post the 75, get them taken down through DMCA, and let the Streisand effect take over.
Knowledge is how to play a game, intelligence is how to win, wisdom is knowing what game to play.
First off, anyone in the psychology field would be offended by what has been done here. A large portion of effectiveness of this test relies on people not having seen it before.
Second, you want to argue that 75 questions constitutes fair use? Like if I throw the first three chapters of a book onto the Internet?
Third, this test is *never* used for employment purposes. It's purely one of many tools to evaluate psychological conditions on a variety of scales, and while the questions seem silly there are *very* good reasons for them. There is a rather large book that goes with test and the scoring system is both very sophisticated and highly validated.
This was outright irresponsible.
Which isn't copyright controlled.
It also has no expressive content (so not a copyrightable expression) and lots of other things. That the norm is now to forget that "expressive content" is not a change to the law, just how people want the law to change.
The law still says "expressive content".
And you ARE allowed to report the full text if you need to for reasons of criticism, reporting and satire.
Anyone have any advice on a good local anesthetic, type of kitchen knife to use, and the rating of fishing line I can use to close the incision? I'm too cheap to consult a doctor, but you guys know about this stuff right?
Life needs more saving throws.
A few years ago, I wrote a PHP-based scoring program for the MMPI-2. I had written on the site that should NCS/Pearson ever come across it, they're welcome to email me and I'd take it down. Instead, several months after having posted it, my host received a takedown request and suspended my account. Although I managed to get the hosting straightened out, NCS/Pearson will not let anyone publish either parts of the test or any scoring program that has not been authorized by them. In my mind, it's just a case of security through obscurity. As we all know, that works out really well.
"You're in a desert walking along in the sand when all of the sudden you look down and you see a tortoise, Leon, it's crawling towards you. You reach down, you flip the tortoise over on its back, Leon. The tortoise lays on its back, its belly baking in the hot sun beating its legs trying to turn itself over but it can't, not without your help, but you're not helping. Why is that Leon?"
1.I like mechanics magazines - Negative ... depends ... although ... i have to say ... the alien whose ufo crashed in my back yard and is living at my place ever since ... you know ... sometimes there's that strange light coming out of his room at night ... ... well. So i'm gonna say yes.
2.I have a good appetite - Positive
3.I wake up fresh & rested most mornings - If by morning you mean noon, then yes.
4.I think I would like the work of a librarian - Never
5.I am easily awakened by noise - Not when I know it doesnt concern me
6.I like to read newspaper articles on crime - There are hardly any on slashdot
7.My hands and feet are usually warm enough - Positive
8.My daily life is full of things that keep me interested - Negative
9.I am about as able to work as I ever was - At least its not gonna get any better
10.There seems to be a lump in my throat much of the time - Negative
11.A person should try to understand his dreams and be guided by or take warning from them - Negative
12.I enjoy detective or mystery stories - Some of the time
13.I work under a great deal of tension - Negative
14.I have diarrhea once a month or more - Negative
15.Once in a while I think of things too bad to talk about - Once in a while I think about things i dont feel the urge to talk about. Im not sure what the _too bad_ part is supposed to mean.
16.I am sure I get a raw deal from life - Negative
17.My father was a good man - In a way...
18.I am very seldom troubled by constipation - Positive
19.When I take a new, I like to be tipped off on whom should be gotten next to - ?
20.My sex life is satisfactory - If a guy is asking me: "Not since i've taken it on with your wife"
If a chick is asking me: "Ask me again after tonight. My place or yours?"
21.At times I have very much wanted to leave home - Negative
22.At times I have fits of laughing & crying that I cannot control - Negative
23.I am troubled by attacks of nausea and vomiting - Negative
24.No one seems to understand me - Ive never cared if they do
25.I would like to be a singer - Negative
26.I feel that it is certainly best to keep my mouth shut when IÃ(TM)m in trouble - Sometimes
27.Evil spirits possess me at times - Id say no...
28.When someone does me a wrong I feel I should pay him back if I can, just for the principle of the thing. - Negative
29.I am bothered by acid stomach several times a week - Negative
30.At times I feel like swearing - Absolutely fucking positive
31.I have nightmares every few nights - Negative
32.I find it hard to keep my mind on a task or job - Positive
33.I have had very peculiar and strange experiences - Negative
34.I have a cough most of the time - Only to cover up my farting
35.If people had not had it in for me I would have been much more successful - Negative
36.I seldom worry about my heath - Sometimes i do have herbal tea, but i do not _worry_ about it. Or do you mean "health"?
37.I have never been in trouble because of my sex behavior - Positive
38.During one period when I was a youngster I engaged in petty thievery - Fifth Amendment.
39.At times I feel like smashing things - Yeah. Usually when #30 applies, too.
40.Most any time I would rather sit and daydream than to do anything else - Sometimes, but not "most any time".
41.I have had periods of days, weeks, or months when I couldnÃ(TM)t take care of things because I couldnÃ(TM)t Ãoeget goingà - Positive
42.My family does not like the work I have chosen ( or the work I intend to choose for my life work) - Negative
43.My sleep is fitful and disturbed - Negative
44.Much of the time my head seems to hurt all over - Negative
45.I do not always tell the truth - Stupid question. "This sentence is false."
46.My judgment is better than it ever was - If your judgment gets worse with time then
47.
George, Let me start by saying, the DMCA is a horrible law that is abused more than it is used legitimately. It should be abolished or re-written to place more of the burden on the complainant or at least create some serious financial penalties to discourage bogus filings (enough that a lawyer would jump to take a good DMCA case on contingency). That said, DMCA is the law and the other side in your case has the law on their side in so far as "process". The DMCA law is not terribly long. I suggest you Google for it and read it yourself. You will see that DMCA has a very specific process under which you get some significant legal protection If you do not follow that process you run significant legal and financial risk. No matter how stupid or unfair, the law is quite clear that you are not eligible for the safe harbor provisions under the law unless you first take down the content. You must then file a counter-notice in federal court. Only a federal judge can say if a post like yours constitutes infringement or is protected by "fair use". The cost of doing could well be in excess of $10,000. I read the post on Slashdot. You are getting a boatload of BAD advice. There were one or two good posts, the rest have been rubbish. It is all well and good for anonymous commenters to grandstand the issue but YOU will be the one writing the check if you lose. As is often the case, some Slashdot readers have said "go to the EFF". You should certainly try them but they are not a legal aid society and can, at best, cherry-pick cases that might help establish legal precedent. They do have some lawyers who will take cases pro bono but that is also going to require some luck on your part. You should also file the take down notice with Chilling Effects. Also, file the case in the Citizen Media Law Project database. I would also strongly recommend that you (and any other bloggers here) read the EFF Legal Guide for Bloggers and/or take the course on Media Law for Bloggers at NewsU. I am well aware that few bloggers want to hear it but the reality is that the term "blogger" has no legal meaning in court. You are a "publisher" and as such are bound by any laws that relate to being a publisher -- defamation, copyright infringement, privacy laws, etc. As a publisher you would be well-advised to have an attorney on retainer. If you cannot afford that you should, at the very least, learn the basics of media law. If you have personal assets like a house, money in the bank or a future income stream, you would be well-advised to consider media liability insurance. You might already have some insurance coverage through an existing policy like homeowners insurance but you should check with your broker to see what exactly is covered. In some cases, only judgements are covered in which case you may be on the hook for legal fees. Also, if you take in ANY money from your site your policy may treat the blog as a business and deny your claim. Bottom line, take 1-2 hours and LEARN about media law. Then make your decisions. Unfortunately, it should become clear that when the other side has a lawyer, YOU need a lawyer and any good lawyer is going to tell you to first take down the material and then decide whether to file a counter-claim. Robert Cox President Media Bloggers Association http://www.mediabloggers.org/ rcox@mediabloggers.org
If I was told to take a test with these questions I would respectfully decline. If it were and issue I would stand up and walk away.
How do you know that they even want to hire you?
And if they make an issue of it I would respectfully ask to see their answers to the same test.
It amazes me that people are so afraid that they will allow an entity to pick their brain and put them into a 'situation'.
Or you could just answer yes to all the questions. Or you could randomly decide and then hand the test in.
If you take a test like this and give it to a stranger then . . . what are they going to do with it when they don't offer you the job?
This is a common sort of lawsuit, and is a textbook example of where the "A New Kind of Justice" legal system succeeds. NCS Pearson is (ultimately) threatening a lawsuit, knowing that:
* The risk (cost) to NCS Pearson for making such a threat is low
* The benefit to NCS Pearson of making the threat is low, but...
* The risk to AntiPolygraph.org of ignoring the threat is high
* The benefit to AntiPolygraph.org of ignoring the threat is low
In our current legal system, the risk (cost) of making most threats is low, and in some cases (not the one above) the benefit is high, so the system produces lots of lawsuits. ANKOJ evens the table: it introduces an element of risk to the plaintiff, and it requires the plaintiff to declare up front what sort of damages they believe they have suffered, so that the defendant can settle without a costly legal defense.
I think, as long as the link isn't advertised as "click here to go to a site with a link to the questions" (as opposed to "click here for a site with lots of information about the MMPI-2 - wink, wink"), and it only links to a site which links to the content in question, it would be difficult for a court to decide in the copyright holder's favor.
It still wouldn't be difficult for "large evil corporation" to waste a lot of this guy's money and time by bringing the matter to court.
I suffered a similar takedown request - apparently the same type of situation - an analysis of a "test".
We ignored the legal request, as they were incorrect in their legal analysis and could not properly claim that we violated their copyright.
Our use of their material was clearly an analysis and critique of a portion of their instrument, and it was obvious it was for academic purposes.
I believe their hope was that we'd just take it down, hiding the analysis and critique.
We ignored them, and they never bothered us again. And if they do come back with a lawsuit, we're totally ready for them.
I'm not a lawyer ... my advice is to talk to a lawyer and make sure you're meeting the basics of fair use. They can still sue you (anyone can, for anything), but you should make sure you have all your ducks in a row.
The sad thing is that, prior to a judge's ruling, fair use is always subjective. And then a judge flips a coin and his word is objective truth.
But you're probably right. Moreso than on the original forum, here on Slashdot you can see there's a lot of discussion about the questions themselves. Everybody's talking about how stupid it is or how strange some questions or groups of questions are; nobody's talking about how seeing these secret questions are going to give them an edge in creating their own competing test.
Indeed, to any layman it looks like you pass at least 3 of the 4 fair use tests with flying colors, and I suspect most people would say the "nature of the work" is functional (though of questionable value) rather than creative.
No, I think you just wanted to make sure the Streisand Effect kicks in, because Slashdot is a far better vector than your own obscure site. You've already made up your mind what you're going to do. :) Good luck with your bully!
"Believe me!" -- Donald Trump
Questionable accuracy and stilted, archaic language aside, can an employer legally require a (potential) employee to take this kind of test?
Many of the questions dwell on the applicant's state of health ("I have had no difficulty in starting or holding my bowel movement"), sexuality ("I am very strongly attracted by members of my own sex") or religious beliefs ("Everything is turning out just like the prophets of the Bible said it would"). Seems to me that this thing is a veritable minefield of discrimination lawsuits.
Well, it doesn't.
""quotation of excerpts in a review or criticism for purposes of illustration or comment; quotation of short passages in a scholarly or technical work, for illustration or clarification of the author's observations; use in a parody of some of the content of the work parodied; summary of an address or article, with brief quotations, in a news report; reproduction by a library of a portion of a work to replace part of a damaged copy; reproduction by a teacher or student of a small part of a work to illustrate a lesson; reproduction of a work in legislative or judicial proceedings or reports; incidental and fortuitous reproduction, in a newsreel or broadcast, of a work located in the scene of an event being reported." "
None of that is what you're doing. Incidentally, the phrase you're really in trouble with is where the court is told explicitly to consider the substantiality of the quotation; you've quoted more than 1/8 of the entire work. Fair use lets you get away with quoting maybe five or six questions in a situation like this, not 75.
Furthermore, you don't actually get to decline the request while you decide what to do. Declining a takedown is a final stance; if you say no, that's not "no while I figure it out", that's no period. You're supposed to be taking the content down until you're convinced it's legal (which it isn't).
The only people here who will tell you that what you're doing is fair use are the people who have never read fair use doctrine. Fair use is for criticism and commentary, and is meant to cover the news and the newspapers talking about things. It is not a blanket to excuse you duplicating and disseminating whatever copywritten material you feel like, even if it's "only" nearly 15% of the complete work.
You're way, way in the wrong here, and you need to call a lawyer and ask, before you get into serious trouble. Slashdot is not a lawyer.
StoneCypher is Full of BS
USC Title 17 section 512 is the relevant part. My thoughts:
I've only gotten one DMCA takedown request. I wrote back and told the guy to go F himself, then firewalled his IP off from my web server. If it'd been something where I felt the requester was in the right I probably would've complied, but... not the case. I'd leave it up if I were you, that seems like fair use if you're using it for discussion purposes.
Actually, you are wrong. In the United States, asking the following types questions of a candidate are illegal:
"When did you graduate from high school?" (legal "are you over 18?")
"What is your native language?" ("Are you authorized to work in the US" is okay)
"Are you married?", "Do you have any children?"
"Are you a member of the Illuminati?"
"What is your weight?" (legal: "can you lift 40 pounds?)
"Have you ever had a heart attack?" (this is a grey area though--think airline pilots, etc)
"Ever been arrested?" (legal: "Ever been convicted of money laundering", and you are applying to be an accountant)
"Did you serve in Vietnam?"
(USATODAY)
Know your rights--keep in mind you may have more depending on the state you live in.
Know that people aren't always aware they can't ask these kinds of questions. You are also free to disclose any of it, like your age, even if they don't ask (many people disclose their age on their resume and don't even realize it. Never add the date when you graduated from high school.)
The key here is that if an employer bases their hiring decision on the fact you served in Vietnam, they are in the wrong. If they didn't hire you as a programmer because you are 45, they are wrong. If they didn't hire you as some hot-shot because you have kids, they are wrong.
1. Start a law practice, hang up a shingle.
2. Advertise that your practice is limited to handling litigations for people who got their legal advice by following the consensus opinion of comments modded "+3" or higher on Slashdot.
3. ???????
4. Profit!
Ray Beckerman +5 Insightful
Did the OP not go to school? Imagine finding the first 5 of your 10 question final exam on the internet, posted for "intellectual" discussion. You probably would have made second grade. Sheesh, no you shouldn't post it on the internet dumbfuck.
I think there's one more factor at play here:
It's "Unclear" whether or not the copyright holder would pursue a claim against an unauthorized publisher in The Netherlands. My uneducated guess is that the copyright holder "Might" give up after sending a few notices.
They don't grade fathers, but if your daughter's a stripper, you fucked up. --Chris Rock
... though you should take anything I say as general information rather than advice specific to your issue.
The DMCA safe harbor provision is intended to cover user-generated content posted to your website by a third party. The idea is that you, as a website operator, should not responsible for someone else's conduct so long as you take it down.
There is also case law (Lenz v. Universal) out of a California District Court holding that a copyright owner has an obligation to consider whether or not a particular use of its work is fair use *prior to sending a DMCA takedown notice,* and that failing to do so could constitute bad faith abuse of the DMCA.
Sending a counter-notice, as you appear to have done, is definitely a good way to go especially if you believe that the reproduction of approximately 13 percent of the MMPI constitutes fair use. However, you seem to be in an odd situation. The normal case is for the website operator (you) to take down the post and notify the original author (the user). Then the user decides whether to file a counter-notice.
That being said, whether or not copying the questions constitutes fair use depends largely on a few things, which are embodied in the four-factor test that someone has surely mentioned in a post by now.
As a practical matter, it's all about context. Did you do anything other than just posting the questions? Showing that you used the questions as part of a larger work where you contributed your own thoughts and expression would make your fair use argument stronger (it's not copyright infringement - it's citation!). If all you did was copy the questions and post them without much of what courts call "transformative" use (i.e. creative input on your part), then that weakens your argument.
Looking at the Google Cache of the original post, it seems to consist of a brief introduction:
"I have done quite a bit of research on the MMPI 2 used by psychological testing. Here's the first 75 out of 567 questions. I could give out rest of them & how some of them are interpeted by psychologists for advice on admitting past history on the psych & medical tests. See my post on "Help with Admissions for Psych & Medial""
And then the rest is the questions. So the issue is whether or not the user-contributed content is enough.
I'm posting late, not sure anyone will even read this. Emails like the one you received from the Corporate Attorney are likely composed of boiler-plate language, designed to scare you into removing the content from your web page. Given the status of your website and the non-profit nature of the discussion, I find it unlikely that the attorneys would resume litigation against you. I say keep it up.
4.)You're even more foolish if you don't immediately publish the entire document on Wikileaks.
Are you certain the leak can't be traced back to you?
It would be inconvenient - for example - if the ordering of the questions or their wording were unique to your copy of the test.
The geek is the most trusting of souls when he thinks he has a sympathetic ear.
PRQ is said to have "almost no information about its clientele and maintains few if any of its own logs" Wikileaks
Said by whom?
Can anything said about Wikileaks be independently verified?
The replicant test in Blade Runner.
It sounds like you've heard from these people before, and they backed down after you refused to comply with their request. This is probably due to their lack to desire to pursue a claim against you all the way in The Netherlands.
Unfortunately, past performance says nothing about the future. I am not a lawyer, but according to US copyright law, I don't see how this could be construed as a fair use. Consult an attorney or decide for yourself.
I am, however, a landlord, so I am familiar with the thinking that goes into whether or not to pursue action in court. Some questions to ask yourself:
So, is it worth it for them to pursue you?
So far, all they've done is had an in-house lawyer send you a notice at a cost of a first-class letter. Hardly a commitment of resources. But if you're costing them a lot of money, I would not expect this matter to just "go away", and from a fair use perspective, I think you have an exceptionally weak defense.
They don't grade fathers, but if your daughter's a stripper, you fucked up. --Chris Rock
Nobody's stated the obvious:
- ignore it
The Supreme Court has ruled that a law contrary to the Constitution is as if the law never existed. I think the same applies to DMCA takedown notices. Since the poster only listed a "fair use" portion of the test, not the whole thing, and copyright law protects fair use, the DMCA notice is contrary to existing copyright laws, and therefore it is as if it never existed. It has no force of law.
The only time I would pay any attention to such a notice is if I was drug into court, and then I'd hire a small gaggle of lawyers to defend me.
"I disapprove of what you say, but I will defend to the death your right to say it." - historian Evelyn Beatrice Hall
Nobody's stated the obvious:
- ignore it
The Supreme Court has ruled that a law contrary to the Constitution is as if the law never existed. I think the same applies to DMCA takedown notices. Since the poster only listed a "fair use" portion of the test, not the whole thing, and copyright law protects fair use, the DMCA notice is contrary to existing copyright laws, and therefore it is as if it never existed. It has no force of law.
The only time I would pay any attention to such a notice is if I was drug into court, and then I'd hire a small gaggle of lawyers to defend me. Otherwise I'd just file it away and forget about it.
"I disapprove of what you say, but I will defend to the death your right to say it." - historian Evelyn Beatrice Hall
I would send a request back for verification of ownership and give them a few weeks to respond and take it down until the time expires or the show proof of ownership. If they don't respond put it back up and keep all records of contact just in cause. That way you can say you played ball and they ignored your request for verification. Hope that helps. Of course in all cases you really should get a lawyer and get your 60mins of advice.
...as part of a requirement of volunteering with children.
Basically all my responses fell into "normal" ranges. The test tests for paranoia, introversion, extroversion and schizophrenia, as well as if people are "faking it". The test told me that I was trying to make myself look a little better than I actually was, which was understandable, as this volunteer position was fairly important to me :-)
I'm a geek and I don't think this test is biased against geeks. I'm a lady geek too. I don't think this test is used for the situations you describe.
It's also used in divorce cases as well as mental institutions (ie, someone is faking mental illness because they have nowhere else to go). I can respect that they do not want their test on the web, as it should only be used by professionals that are trained in interpreting the results. Same goes with Meyers-Briggs. Our HR lady was fully MB trained and could tell you more about the test, types and results than those quickie little quizzes on the web.
This test, as it seems, is for a low-IQ applicant for a menial job....
I'd like to know why anyone would answer these questions for a menial, minimum wage job. Are there just not enough of these types of jobs to go around?
Buck
"A good programmer is someone who looks both ways before crossing a one-way street." -- Doug Linder
and any amount less than that would be quoting for a report.
And, since copyright doesn't cover that which is being done to report, it's fine.
Holden: You're in a desert, walking along in the sand, when all of a sudden you look down...
Leon: What one?
Holden: What?
Leon: What desert?
Holden: It doesn't make any difference what desert, it's completely hypothetical.
Leon: But, how come I'd be there?
Holden: Maybe you're fed up. Maybe you want to be by yourself. Who knows? You look down and see a tortoise, Leon. It's crawling toward you...
Leon: Tortoise? What's that?
Holden: [irritated by Leon's interruptions] You know what a turtle is?
Leon: Of course!
Holden: Same thing.
Leon: I've never seen a turtle... But I understand what you mean.
Holden: You reach down and you flip the tortoise over on its back, Leon.
Leon: Do you make up these questions, Mr. Holden? Or do they write 'em down for you?
Holden: The tortoise lays on its back, its belly baking in the hot sun, beating its legs trying to turn itself over, but it can't. Not without your help. But you're not helping.
Leon: [angry at the suggestion] What do you mean, I'm not helping?
Holden: I mean you're not helping! Why is that, Leon?
[Leon has become visibly shaken]
Holden: They're just questions, Leon. In answer to your query, they're written down for me. It's a test, designed to provoke an emotional response... Shall we continue?
Wow, I hate questions like these. Some of the questions could be interpreted in very different ways between the questioner and questionee. They want true or false answers when many of them are not absolute, or may not even apply.
What is 2 + 2? True or false?
How do you feel? True or false?
Are you a gruntwaffle? True or false?
My understanding is that "fair use" is defined by community standards (I am not a lawyer). If everyone uses 20% regularly, it might eventually become "fair" ... :-)
I worked for a major research university doing digital content development and distribution for almost two decades. I know where the lines are and you crossed one and that's why you got the notice. Fair use will NOT protect you in this instance because you posted it in a non-regulated way. Again, fair use depends on limited distribution/use as well as a less than whole citation of work. Make some lawyer friends, too. :-)
Comment removed based on user account deletion
I do not claim to be an expert on this subject, but I was always told that the quoted excerpt needs to be less than 10% of the source material to fall under fair use rules.
Screw the questions, man. Post the friggin' answers!
There aren't any "correct" answers, it's more about patterns of answers and in what categories they place the test taker.
For example, all schizophrenics tend to answer the same questions the same way and all paranoids answer the same questions the same way, but the pattern of answers is different. Any answer to any single question means nothing.
If you take a written version of the test, the answer bubbles at the top of the columns (IIRC) are scored to represent the truthfulness of the taker. Those questions are about minor bad things we all have all done, but don't want to confess to (like bed-wetting or petty theft); nobody answers them all truthfully and I suspect that if you did, you would be scored as deceitful.
It's not a good test choice for employment screening, but it's popular. Knowing the questions and having time to reflect on the answers and giving false answers to awkward questions just screws up the evaluation of the test results and probably not in a useful way.
I've always wondered what would happen if you refused to take the test for employment or answered all "true" or returned a blank sheet. Any Slashdotters ever do that?
"I believe in Karma. That means I can do bad things to people all day long and I assume they deserve it." : Dogbert
Comment removed based on user account deletion
Comment removed based on user account deletion
Disemvowel the test and send a disemvowelled reply to the scumbags, umm, lawyers stating you have done so. :-)
Fair use is a pretty limited defence for copyright infringement. There may be case law that defines the scope of the defence. I can't comment on US law but in Canada for example factors are whether the use is for private study and research, and how much of the work you've taken. In addition the fact that you've re-published the work on a public website is likely really important. You may have the right to "fair use" but you certainly don't have the right to republish to the entire world, unless you've got a really, really good reason.
The takedown notice indicates the owner is interested in protecting its property, which means you might indeed be sued. So, I'd take it seriously. As Slashdot knows, the courts have been pretty sympathetic to owners of intellectual property lately. Do you really want to be on the pointy end of the sword? Is this the hill you want to die on?
See a lawyer. Or, take it down. You said you used 75 or so questions out of 550 ish? Sounds like more than 10% which is sometimes used as a threshhold for fair use (again, at least in Canada).
I do not see how using bittorrent would protect you. Contrary to what the RIAA and cronies say, all "illegal pirate" P2P programs don't make you untraceable. In fact, bittorrent very much does not. That protocol was made to keep download sites from being slashdotted, it does nothing to hide where your file came from. There have been some attempts to sort of make it that way, but I don't think they have been a success.
Use Freenet for that, as it was designed to hide who or where the file came from and muddy the legal waters as to whether they can evade enough reasonable doubt to arrest you. I suppose it may make it hard to sue you as well if you don't announce who you are. In fact, we should all be using Freenet for discussion, since it would make censorship of what we say difficult. Only problem: last time I tried it, it was a pain in the ass. I think they also have a closed development model, which explains why its progress is slow. They are still at version 0.7, isn't that 5 years old?
There is also GNUnet. Haven't tried it or heard much about it, and frankly many official GNU projects suck, but maybe it will take off somehow?
I think the thing is publishing the protocol. I am not sure the Freenet project has done this (in any digestable form, anyway), so I don't see how development can move forward since very few are able to work on it. GNUnet published a bunch of papers about their protocol, so I think it may be possible for others to write alternate implementations. Sort of like how the gnutella protocol was reverse engineered, and it became one of the most used P2P system, except the GNUnet people were more open from the beginning...
Though I am looking for something like this which will be a success. I am not sure where to go. So far, Freenet or GNUnet seem to be the best chance for freedom of speech on the Internet.
But 75 seems excessive to prove a point, particularly for test questions, that's getting on for 10% of the score. The fuzziness would end you up in a situation arguing that that amount is fair use. If you had an article and had 3 or 4, I would say it'd be pretty clear cut.
Let's not discourage someone from asking questions. Believe it or not, brainstorming amongst intelligent people can make you more aware of the things you should consider - even in the field of law. Anecdotal information can also pass on advice from a legal professional to someone who was in a similar situation, without the need to hire someone else to tell you the exact same thing. Yes, we know that similar situations may be different in a small yet important way. We take that into account. Let's not be awed by the law in relatively simple situation, and certainly not be awed by legal professionals in general - no slight intended.
Basically, I would have seen enough from this thread to take it down, as it does not appear to meet the common definition of fair use. If it was a close call, and the explanations here of the possible need to defend any fair use in court were not a deterrent, then perhaps a lawyer would be called for at that point. I just don't think I'd want to pay for an overpriced consult just to get the safe counsel that there is some risk and it would be best to remove it. Better to get paid advice when I plan to take it farther and the advice requires more expertise.
I've gotten good information from non-lawyers before - who were subsequently muzzled by the state bar who threatened to pursue charges of giving legal advice without a license, despite their disclaimers - when information, not advice was all I was looking for. Naturally, the assertion that you always need a lawyer to be able to make a decision on any legal question is self-serving.
Those are my principles. If you don't like them I have others. -Groucho Marx
Most likely, this test would open the employer up to a massive Americans with Disability Act lawsuit. I have kidney failure and had two strokes, so I'm sure I would fail all the "hypochondria" questions. In fact, looking at some of the first "hypochondria" questions, I would fail them because I also have acid reflux. I am sure quite a few disabled people, or even people with minor medical problems would fail the "hypochondria" questions. I'm amazed at how fucking scumbags like to shit on people who have medical problems (even minor ones), yet think they are great people who should have a rock star's salary. I hope they come down with a major medical problem and their own firm fires them.
Obviously they are trying to weed out people with disabilities whether or not it applies to the job. This would also detect people who don't even know they have a disability. It could even be a condition which no one in their right mind would consider a disability or even a problem, yet these productive people will be eliminated from having a decent job.
I have seen a common thread where when someone comes down with an ailment and they don't know what it is, persist for years just trying to get doctors and friends and family to even recognize it--instead often being called a hypochondriac, lazy, or whatever. Sometimes there are treatments, but they won't find it if others just dismiss their symptoms. They also should be on disability but are not because doctors will not diagnose them and the system doesn't want people to know about programs or "qualify" for them.
Politicians write up "feel good" laws, but don't back them with the money. They just set them up to weed out as many people as they can, regardless of whether the applicant is really disabled, or a undeserving con artist. In fact, the con artists are more likely to get disablilty than a disabled person, because the bureaucrats expect the person to be able to "sell" themselves somehow. Like if you have a brain aliment you can somehow be a salesman. That makes a lot of fucking sense.
I'm sure there are many diseases we recognize now which were just called hypochondria before. MS, Aids, low level strokes, cancer all had times when even doctors didn't know what they were and undoubtedly diagnosed them as "hypochondria" (some probably still do) ... until the person died from it. "I guess that person was actually sick." (Then again, the doctor probably just said it was "natural causes")
If you are not missing a limb or some other obvious outward problem, people just dismiss any medical problems you might have. Just by looking at me you couldn't tell my kidneys don't work or I have severe brain damage. They just think I'm "faking" it. Like I could somehow fake blood tests or brain scans. And of course they don't want me to work because there is no way I could fit into their 40+ hours/week sit at a desk mold. This day and age, people could probably work less than 10 hours per week if there wasn't so much paperwork bureaucracy bullshit and idiots didn't smash down so much on automation. (Automation makes our lives easier) Shitheads. Fine assholes, I'll just sit on my ass until I die. I hope you fuck yourselves into bailout hell with a thorny axe.
Fair use is copying 10% for the purpose of study. Any more than that is copyright infringement.
Therefore, if you only had about 56.7 of the questions you'd be within the fair use 10% limit.
Of course it takes some work and you may find it hard to reword all the questions while keeping the same meaning.
Does changing the question, "I like mechanics magazines" to "Do you like reading articles on engineering" change the meaning too much? I don't believe so.
The most dangerous drug
I believe I have a copyright on the phrase "DMCA notice", and I file to take down your post. I submit only accurate information on the DMCA notice, except in that it is unlikely any court would rule that I have rights on that phrase. Your post gets taken down. I will not be prosecuted for perjury.
Face it, the DMCA should have included fines, which grow exponentially for each offense, for repeatedly submitting notices which are procedurally valid but found to be baseless by a court.
Wow, another armchair lawyer.
Slashdot - The great and glorious cluster fuck of Internet wisdom.
If you have a counter-example which shows that I'm wrong, I'd be greatly interested.
Until then, we're both armchair posters.
..."Why don't I do what they are telling me so I don't get sued out of existence, even though I might be right?"
Dude, paraphrase the damned questions, do what they are saying, and get the copyrighted material off.
Even if you "win" you lose. Unless, of course, you have the money to burn defending yourself, or get pro bono representation by the EFF or something. In that case, by all means, fight them. Knock yourself out!
IANAL but this is just common sense. This is the land of the golden rule and if you can't afford representation, or get free representation, you do what you are told or you will suffer.
If you can fight it and plan to, why do you care what we think? Your attorney can give you much better advice. If you can't afford it, get that crap off your site before the take down offer is no longer any good and they start the suit.
The reality of the matter is you have to decide if spending a bunch of money on attorney(s) is worth keeping a forum post up unchanged. I'd like to answer your question with one of my own. Is it worth it to you?
-Viz
Don't kid yourself. It's the size of the regexp AND how you use it that counts.