User talk:Catbird222

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

[edit] East of Eden

You recently made a change to the East of Eden page, without an explanation why (i.e. in your edit summary). I have reverted the change, and provided a reference to the connection between East of Eden and Anna Nalick's "Drink Me". − Twas Now 09:55, 11 January 2007 (UTC)

I have again made the change described above, and reverted many other changes. Please don't removed cited facts without an explanation. It would be helpful if you would explain these changes on the Talk pages, or at a minimum use edit summaries. thanks. bikeable (talk) 04:14, 12 January 2007 (UTC)

If your claim that Anna Nalick infringed upon Steinbeck's copyright is true (any references?), do not remove that section from the popular culture section. Perhaps make a note after that she has been reprimanded for such infringement. Additionally, according to imdb, Ron Howard is in fact slated to direct the new film. − Twas Now 13:35, 12 January 2007 (UTC)

Ron howard dropped out of the movie. Imdb is wrong. Catbird222 14:11, 12 January 2007 (UTC)

If IMDB is not up-to-date, make a comment on the East of Eden talk page and cite the source where you found that information. Your actions on that page almost amount to vandalism since you have not provided sufficient information to warrant them (e.g. removing Anna Nalick, Babyshambles). − Twas Now 21:36, 12 January 2007 (UTC)

I own the copyright and the film rights. I know of what I speak. Catbird222 22:12, 12 January 2007

After reading the lyrics to Anna Nalick's "Drink Me", I do not see how that song could possibly have infringed upon the Steinbeck copyright. The connection between that song and the book is so slight, in fact, that it would be difficult to determine a connection if Nalick had not personally acknowledged the influence of East of Eden in this interview.

Regardless, I believe pop-culture references to East of Eden are acceptable under fair use laws, and they should not be removed from the article. The point of a popular culture section is to show the significance a work has had on the world, not to exhibit works sanctioned by the copyright holders (mainly because Wikipedia is not an advertisement).

Also, please provide a reference to Ron Howard dropping the movie project. You may or may not be the Steinbeck heir, but as far as anyone knows, you are simply a vandal. If we can not come to an agreement, I will have to go through the motions of dispute resolution.

— Twas Now 05:36, 13 January 2007 (UTC)

PS Supposing you do own the copyrights, why are you busy editing Wikipedia instead of finding a new director now that Howard is apparently no longer involved?

I am curious as to who you are. Frankly, if you wish to continue dissimenating false information, then you will only look the fool. If you really need your proof then you may wish to speak to legal. In the meantime, check your facts more closely. We license copyright to those we choose, not to those you choose. If Ms. Nalick based a property upon copywritten material, then I can assure you there are licensing issues. We will deal with those issues through her publisher, not a Wikifairy. Regarding Mr. Howard's decision to drop out of the film, well if you really want the facts, then you might wish to call his agent in Beverly Hills. If you subscribe to Imdb Pro then you should have his number. If you don't then you really don't know what's going on. Catbird222 03:08, 13 January 2007

The claim that the song is violating any copyright is patent nonsense. I recommend you read the lyrics to the song and decide for yourself. Furthermore, there is no law which states "a work (call it X) inspired by another work (call it Y) is in violation of work Y copyrights unless the owners of X pay royalties to the owners of work Y, or come to some other agreement regarding licensing". Please familiarize yourself with fair use laws, as well as Wikipedia's fair use policy. There is no justification for removing these pop-culture references.

I think you have ignored the East of Eden talk page too long considering your supposed involvement in this matter.

Now, since this has been going on for several days, and since another editor has stepped in and reverted your vandalism, only to be removed again by yourself, I am asking the Mediation Cabal for assistance in this matter. Please see Wikipedia:Mediation Cabal/Cases/2007-01-13 East of Eden for our case.

— Twas Now 17:09, 13 January 2007 (UTC)

Catbird222 constantly vandalizes the John Steinbeck IV site and Nancy Steinbeck site by removing external links, and has recently accused the parties of fraud in a slanderous and libelous manner. Bikeable recently reverted one of Catbird's edits and questioned the accusation of fraud, but Catbird immediately changed Bikeable's rv back to her original post. This person has established a pattern of internet stalking and tells untruths about the lives of Nancy Steinbeck and John Steinbeck IV. Catbird has also twice removed the name of Nancy Steinbeck's daughter, Megan Steinbeck, from the Lew Hunter site. Mr. Hunter now monitors his site to assure that Megan is included in the list of his students. While it may not be possible to address this matter in the present mediation, we would like the mediators to know about this unscrupulous, irresposible, vicious behavior. Thank you, Nsteinbeck

Please do not remove content from Wikipedia You have recently removed content from Wikipedia without reason, after having already been warned about such behaviour. Please stop now, as further vandalism may result in you being blocked from editing Wikipedia. You are still welcome to (and encouraged to) carry out constructive edits on Wikipedia articles.

Also note that there still seems to be a Mediation case open in this matter... NipokNek 08:33, 21 January 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard Discussion

Hi there. I've seen the edits you have made to the East of Eden article, and have also seen the claims you have made that you are the owner of the East of Eden copyright, or that you work for the company who does. I have started a discussion on the Administrators' noticeboard, which you can find here to sort out what is happening in regards to the above mentioned article. I have also requested the Brad Patrick comment on the discussion, per your suggestion on the Mediation cabal page. Many thanks, Thε Halo ^Θ 23:18, 24 January 2007 (UTC)

It may also be of interest to you to read Wikipedia:Contact us/Article problem/Copyright. Thε Halo ^Θ 23:56, 24 January 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Truce on East of Eden

I would like to call a truce regarding East of Eden. We will leave the article as it is now, without the information you removed. However, I am requesting comment at Wikipedia:Village pump (policy)#Inspiration is copyright infringement? for a greater audience to take part in this discussion.

You may wish to comment there, though I have adequately cited the places this dispute has been discussed so far (this page, here, and here. − Twas Now ( talk • contribs • e-mail ) 08:14, 1 February 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Copyright issue with Johnny Irion

Hello. Concerning your contribution, Johnny Irion, we cannot accept copyrighted text or images borrowed from either web sites or printed material. This article or image appears to be a direct copy from http://www.yeproc.com/artist_info.php?artistId=318. As a copyright violation, Johnny Irion appears to qualify for speedy deletion under the speedy deletion criteria. Johnny Irion has been tagged for deletion, and may have been deleted by the time you see this message. For text material, please consider rewriting the content and citing the source, provided that it is credible.

If you believe that the article or image is not a copyright violation, or if you have permission from the copyright holder to release the content freely under the GNU Free Documentation License (GFDL) then you should do one of the following:

• If you have permission from the author leave a message explaining the details at Talk:Johnny Irion and send an email with the message to "permissions-en (at) wikimedia (dot) org". See Wikipedia:Requesting copyright permission for instructions.
• If a note on the original website states that re-use is permitted under the GFDL or released into the public domain leave a note at Talk:Johnny Irion with a link to where we can find that note.
• If you own the copyright to the material: send an e-mail from an address associated with the original publication to permissions-en(at)wikimedia(dot)org or a postal message to the Wikimedia Foundation permitting re-use under the GFDL, and note that you have done so on Talk:Johnny Irion.

However, for text content, you may want to consider rewriting the content in your own words. Thank you, and please feel free to continue contributing to Wikipedia. – riana_dzasta 08:16, 4 March 2007 (UTC)

[edit] East of Eden issues

I have not made any changes to East of Eden since February 1, 2007, so I do not know why you say I have been reverting changes. In fact, the last time I reverted your changes was January 14, 2007. Furthermore, since discovering that Nancy might be misleading people about the Steinbeck family, I have not asked her for any more help with my case.

However, the artists referenced at East of Eden do not need to be Steinbeck-approved to be included in the article. The Steinbeck family does not own Wikipedia, nor does it own any article on Wikipedia—not even articles about John Steinbeck or his books! Please read Wikipedia:Ownership of articles.

The musicians mentioned in the article are simply people who were inspired by the book, East of Eden and wrote songs very loosely based on the story. I do not see how there could even be an issue with the songs. What exactly are the licensing issues you are talking about? Is there new legislation making it illegal to find inspiration in other works? Even if they were infringing on Steinbeck copyrights, those songs should be included in the article. There is an entire article on cultural references to the novel The Catcher in the Rye and many other novels have similar pages. The weak pseudo-legal arguments you have been giving me suggest to me that you are, at best, a young member of the Steinbeck family who is barely involved in legal issues.

The Ron Howard thing is a different matter, and I don't think it is too important whether or not that information is in the article. I am fine with leaving it out. But you are trying to tell me that Hollywood directors would be deterred if they saw that someone was already slated to direct the movie. This implies that Hollywood directors come to Wikipedia to look for job openings! This borders on absurd. Steven Spielberg is not looking for a new movie to direct by sifting through Wikipedia articles on upcoming movies.

So basically:

1. I have not reverted East of Eden since January 14. Don't harass me about it.
2. You don't own the article on East of Eden.
3. The songs influenced by the book don't need to be licensed to be mentioned in the article. Some books have entire Wikipedia articles just about their cultural influence.
4. Hollywood directors have time-honoured resources for finding work (usually producers approach them).

You should also read Wikipedia:Conflict of interest. Since you claim to be intimately involved with the subject at hand, you shouldn't even be editing these articles at all. If you do not like the way things work at Wikipedia, then I suggest you ignore the site altogether. − Twas Now ( talk • contribs • e-mail ) 06:37, 6 March 2007 (UTC)