Discussion History Literature / TheSalvationWar

Also, the Ukrainian did not \\\"cross-post them\\\" he torrented them. However, the fact remains that the emails sent to the author stated that the Ukrainian in question had torrented the stories because they \\\"offended his religion\\\" - the guy in question later tried to retract it by claiming it was a joke after it was pointed out the comment had put him in a compromised legal position. (In fairness, it is quite possible that he was joking; the reason why this whole affair escalated was that he refused to take the issue seriously. It is also quite possible that the author took the worst possible interpretation of the Ukrainian\\\'s comments as a reaction to the latter\\\'s light-hearted refusal to acknowledge the seriousness of what he had done.) Taking his statements at face value, attempting to screw something up because it \\\"offends his religion\\\" is the act of a fundamentalist and that puts the author\\\'s claim was a reasonable assumption from the facts then apparent. He also emailed the author direct from his home address and used his real name, thus providing a direct link back to him.

The fact that the stories were publicaly accessible is meaningless; they were still copyright and publishing them elsewhere without permission is still piracy. Just because something is made available free of charge does not put it in the public domain. The author had every right to be angered by his conduct, especially since the chance of publishing the story through regular channels was screwed up. Despite having his work stolen and published by a pirate, the author\\\'s reaction was an entirely reasonable statement that if the opportunity for legal remedies presented itself, he would take it (while admitting they probably would not) and he would not write the planned third part due to the lack of a financial future for it, instead concentrating on works that would generate a financial return. It would be possible to publish them via self-publishing still but that would require significant investment. Since the return on that investment would be questionable, it isn\\\'t going to happen. Instead, the story was re-posted elsewhere so that those who enjoyed it could continue to read it

Also, the Ukrainian did not \\\"cross-post them\\\" he torrented them. However, the fact remains that the emails sent to the author stated that the Ukrainian in question had torrented the stories because they \\\"offended his religion\\\" - the guy in question later tried to retract it by claiming it was a joke after it was pointed out the comment had put him in a compromised legal position. (In fairness, it is quite possible that he was joking; the reason why this whole affair escalated was that he refused to take the issue seriously. It is also quite possible that the author took the worst possible interpretation of the Ukrainian\\\'s comments as a reaction to the latter\\\'s light-hearted refusal to acknowledge the seriousness of what he had done.) Taking his statements at face value, attempting to screw something up because it \\\"offends his religion\\\" is the act of a fundamentalist and that puts the author\\\'s claim was a reasonable assumption from the facts then apparent. He also emailed the author direct from his home address and used his real name, thus providing a direct link back to him.

The fact that the stories were publicaly accessible is meaningless; they were still copyright and publishing them elsewhere without permission is still piracy. Just because something is made available free of charge does not put it in the public domain. The author had every right to be angered by his conduct, especially since the chance of publishing the story through regular channels was screwed up. Your \\\"ITG\\\" comment is inappropriate in the extreme; all he did was say that if the opportunity for legal remedies presented itself, he would take it (while admitting they probably would not) and he would not write the planned third part due to the lack of a financial future for it, instead concentrating on works that would generate a financial return. That is very far from being an ITG reaction. It would be possible to publish them via self-publishing still but that would require significant investment. Since the return on that investment would be questionable, it isn\\\'t going to happen. Instead, the story was re-posted elsewhere for those who enjoyed it.

Not true. The threads you link to are groundless accusations; since the people making them had no access to the original exchange of emails between the Ukrainian and the author, their statements can be disregarded. Also, the Ukrainian did not \\\"cross-post them\\\" he torrented them. However, the fact remains that the emails sent to the author stated that the Ukrainian in question had torrented the stories because they \\\"offended his religion\\\" - the guy in question later tried to retract it by claiming it was a joke after it was pointed out the comment had put him in a compromised legal position. (In fairness, it is quite possible that he was joking; the reason why this whole affair escalated was that he refused to take the issue seriously. It is also quite possible that the author took the worst possible interpretation of the Ukrainian\\\'s comments as a reaction to the latter\\\'s light-hearted refusal to acknowledge the seriousness of what he had done.) Taking his statements at face value, attempting to screw something up because it \\\"offends his religion\\\" is the act of a fundamentalist and that puts the author\\\'s claim was a reasonable assumption from the facts then apparent. He also emailed the author direct from his home address and used his real name, thus providing a direct link back to him.

The fact that the stories were publicaly accessible is meaningless; they were still copyright and publishing them elsewhere without permission is still piracy. Just because something is made available free of charge does not put it in the public domain. The author had every right to be angered by his conduct, especially since the chance of publishing the story through regular channels was screwed up. Your \\\"ITG\\\" comment is inappropriate in the extreme; all he did was say that if the opportunity for legal remedies presented itself, he would take it (while admitting they probably would not) and he would not write the planned third part due to the lack of a financial future for it, instead concentrating on works that would generate a financial return. That is very far from being an ITG reaction. It would be possible to publish them via self-publishing still but that would require significant investment. Since the return on that investment would be questionable, it isn\\\'t going to happen. Instead, the story was re-posted elsewhere for those who enjoyed it.

Not true. The threads you link to are groundless accusations; since the people making them had no access to the original exchange of emails between the Ukrainian and the author, their statements can be disregarded. Also, the Ukrainian did not \\\"cross-post them\\\" he torrented them. However, the fact remains that the emails sent to the author stated that the Ukrainian in question had torrented the stories because they \\\"offended his religion\\\" - the guy in question later tried to retract it by claiming it was a joke after it was pointed out the comment had put him in a compromised legal position. (In fairness, it is quite possible that he was joking; the reason why this whole affair escalated was that he refused to take the issue seriously. It is also quite possible that the author took the worst possible interpretation of the Ukrainian\\\'s comments as a reaction to the latter\\\'s light-hearted refusal to acknowledge the seriousness of what he had done.) Taking his statements at face value, attempting to screw something up because it \\\"offends his religion\\\" is the act of a fundamentalist and that puts teh author\\\'s claim asa reasonable assumption from the facts then apparent. He also emailed the author direct from his home address and used his real name, thus providing a direct link back to him.

The fact that the stories were publicaly accessible is meaningless; they were still copyright and publishing them elsewhere without permission is still piracy. Just because something is made available free of charge does not put it in the public domain. The author had every right to be angered by his conduct, especially since the chance of publishing the story through regular channels was screwed up. Your \\\"ITG\\\" comment is inappropriate in the extreme; all he did was say that if the opportunity for legal remedies presented itself, he would take it (while admitting they probably would not) and he would not write the planned third part due to the lack of a financial future for it, instead concentrating on works that would generate a financial return. That is very far from being an ITG reaction. It would be possible to publish them via self-publishing still but that would require significant investment. Since the return on that investment would be questionable, it isn\\\'t going to happen. Instead, the story was re-posted elsewhere for those who enjoyed it.

Not true. The threads you link to are groundless accusations; since the people making them had no access to the original exchange of emails between the Ukrainian and the author, their statements can be disregarded. Also, the Ukrainian did not \\\"cross-post them\\\" he torrented them. However, the fact remains that the emails sent to the author stated that the Ukrainian in question had torrented the stories because they \\\"offended his religion\\\" - the guy in question later tried to retract it by claiming it was a joke after it was pointed out the comment had put him in a compromised legal position. Taking his statements at face value, attempting to screw something up because it \\\"offends his religion\\\" is the act of a fundamentalist. He also emailed the author direct from his home address and used his real name, thus providing a direct link back to him. The fact that the stories were publicaly accessible is meaningless; they were still copyright and publishing them elsewhere without permission is still piracy. Just because something is made available free of charge does not put it in the public domain. The author had every right to be angered by his conduct, especially since the chance of publishing the story through regular channels was screwed up. Your \\\"ITG\\\" comment is inappropriate in the extreme; all he did was say that if the opportunity for legal remedies presented itself, he would take it (while admitting they probably would not) and he would not write the planned third part due to the lack of a financial future for it, instead concentrating on works that would generate a financial return. That is very far from being an ITG reaction. It would be possible to publish them via self-publishing still but that would require significant investment. Since the return on that investment would be questionable, it isn\\\'t going to happen. Instead, the story was re-posted elsewhere for those who enjoyed it.

Not true. The threads you link to are groundless accusations; since the people making them had no access to the original exchange of emails between the Ukrainian and the author, their statements can be disregarded. Also, the Ukrainian did not \\\"cross-post them\\\" he torrented them. However, the fact remains that the emails sent to the author specifically stated that the Ukrainian in question had torrented the stories because they \\\"offended his religion\\\" - the guy in question tried to retract it by claiming it was a joke after it was pointed out the comment had put him in a compromised legal position. Taking his statements at face value, attempting to screw something up because it \\\"offends his religion\\\" is the act of a fundamentalist. He also emailed the author direct from his home address and used his real name, thus providing a direct link back to him. The fact that the stories were publicaly accessible is meaningless; they were still copyright and publishing them elsewhere without permission is still piracy. Just because something is made available free of charge does not put it in the public domain. The author had every right to be angered by his conduct, especially since the chance of publishing the story through regular channels was screwed up. Your \\\"ITG\\\" comment is inappropriate in the extreme; all he did was say that if the opportunity for legal remedies presented itself, he would take it (while admitting they probably would not) and he would not write the planned third part due to the lack of a financial future for it, instead concentrating on works that would generate a financial return. That is very far from being an ITG reaction. It would be possible to publish them via self-publishing still but that would require significant investment. Since the return on that investment would be questionable, it isn\\\'t going to happen. Instead, the story was re-posted elsewhere for those who enjoyed it.

Not true. The threads you link to are groundless accusations; since the people making them had no access to the original exchange of emails between the Ukrainian and the author, their statements can be disregarded. Also, the Ukrainian did not \\\"cross-post them\\\" he torrented them. However, the fact remains that the emails sent to the author specifically stated that the Ukrainian in question had torrented the stories because they \\\"offended his religion\\\" - the guy in question tried to retract it by claiming it was a joke after it was pointed out the comment had put him in a compromised legal position. Taking his statements at face value, attempting to screw something up because it \\\"offends his religion\\\" is the act of a fundamentalist. He also emailed the author direct from his home address and used his real name, thus providing a direct link back to him. The fact that the stories were publicaly accessible is meaningless; they were still copyright and publishing them elsewhere without permission is still piracy. Just because something is made available free of charge does not put it in the public domain. The author had every right to be angered by his conduct, especially since the chance of publishing the story through regular channels was screwed up. It would be possible to publish them via self-publishing still but that would require significant investment. Since the return on that investment would be questionable, it isn\\\'t going to happen. Instead, the story was re-posted elsewhere for those who enjoyed it.

Not true. The threads you link to are groundless accusations; since the people making them had no access to the original exchange of emails between the Ukrainian and the author, their statements can be disregarded. However, the fact remains that the emails sent to the author specifically stated that the Ukrainian in question had torrented the stories because they \\\"offended his religion\\\" - the guy in question tried to retract it by claiming it was a joke after it was pointed out the comment had put him in a compromised legal position. Taking his statements at face value, attempting to screw something up because it \\\"offends his religion\\\" is the act of a fundamentalist. He also emailed the author direct from his home address and used his real name, thus providing a direct link back to him. The fact that the stories were publicaly accessible is meaningless; they were still copyright and publishing them elsewhere without permission is still piracy. Just because something is made available free of charge does not put it in the public domain. The author had every right to be angered by his conduct, especially since the chance of publishing the story through regular channels was screwed up. It would be possible to publish them via self-publishing still but that would require significant investment. Since the return on that investment would be questionable, it isn\\\'t going to happen. Instead, the story was re-posted elsewhere for those who enjoyed it.

Not true. The threads you link to are groundless accusations from a board that is known for hysteria. However, the fact remains that the emails sent to the author specifically stated that the Ukrainian in question had torrented the stories because they \\\"offended his religion\\\" - the guy in question tried to retract it by claiming it was a joke after it was pointed out the comment had put him in a dangerous legal position. Taking his statements at face value, attempting to screw something up because it \\\"offends his religion\\\" is the act of a fundamentalist. He also emailed the author direct from his home address and used his real name, thus providing a direct link back to him. The fact that the stories were publicaly accessible is meaningless; they were still copyright and publishing them elsewhere without permission is still piracy. Just because something is made available free of charge does not put it in the public domain. The author had every right to be angered by his conduct, especially since the chance of publishing the story through regular channels was screwed up. It would be possible to publish them via self-publishing still but that would require significant investment. Since the return on that investment would be questionable, it isn\\\'t going to happen. Instead, the story was re-posted elsewhere.

Not true. The threads you link to are groundless accusations from a board that is known for hysteria. The fact remains that the emails sent to the author specifically stated that the Ukrainian in question had torrented the stories because they \\\"offended his religion\\\" - the guy in question admitted that in public but tried to retract it by claiming it was a joke after it was pointed out the comment had put him in a dangerous legal position. Taking his statements at face value, attempting to screw something up because it \\\"offends his religion\\\" is the act of a fundamentalist. He also emailed the author direct from his home address and used his real name, thus providing a direct link back to him. The fact that the stories were publicaly accessible is meaningless; they were still copyright and publishing them elsewhere without permission is still piracy. The author had every right to be angered by his conduct, especially since the chance of publishing the story through regular channels was screwed up. It would be possible to publish them via self-publishing still but that would require significant investment.