Here’s a site to track aurora activity. Not good now. Dominic also runs a yahoo aurora group. I think there’s a link there on his PBase site, as there is to his other galleries. Check out the owl shot

http://sec.noaa.gov/pmap/

I’ve seen an aurora display like that exactly once, in northeastern Pennsylvania, in what was otherwise a bad date on which I was not quite being nagged into having sex because I was on the rag. The lights in the sky put a stop to everything except sitting on the car hood in the middle of nowhere and looking at them, and I got back to the dorm after curfew (yeah, really) and the nun looked at me funny because I was still dazzled.

I didn’t know till then that you can hear them, the lights I mean. A sort of space-deep soft crackle, like slow static from the other rim of the galaxy.

Another thing I learned, thinking about it later, is that a guy doesn’t have to be particularly insensitive or brutish to think that what’s called for on a date is nagging a woman into having sex. Nevertheless, you want deus ex machina, I got some.

Not to argue with all you have said good common sense, manners, business sense, respect etc, and sounds real nice and legal, but:

This relates to the WORLD WIDE WEB exactly how?

(rhetorical question)

Unless there is a specific notice on a website telling you that you don’t have to ask to reuse specific material in large part or in its entirety, you should always ask first, and then act in accordance with whatever answer you get. It’s polite, and it also keeps you undeniably on the good side of the law.

If you are merely quoting a portion of something, or even several portions, this is usually considered “fair use,” and so you usually don’t have to ask, but you must give credit for the source.

To reuse original images not already in the public domain (which would include things the creators have specifically put into the public domain or things that are old enough that not only the creator but the creator’s heirs are deceased, usu. over a hundred years old), you must ask in order to legally — and politely — republish them in any context whatsoever, and you must receive written permission (e-mail counts). If you never hear back on your request, you must not construe silence as permission.

Lots of bloggers take care of questions like this with something called a Creative Commons license, and they will usually display a symbol for this in one of their blog’s sidebars. There are various levels; if you want to use something on a site with a CC license, you should first confirm that the specific license at that site actually grants you the right to do so in the manner you intend. You can read more about this at http://www.CreativeCommons.org.

Others, such as myself, put very specific instructions in the sidebar, watermark all images, and mark everything as copyrighted. You must follow directives of these types to stay on the good side of the law and to keep it all friendly.

Even if no such directives are posted, and even if there is no notice of a Creative Commons license or similar device, I would strongly advise you to ask permission before reusing any material.

The fact that laws regarding certain types of copyright infringement may be unclear, or even that they may or may not be enforceable, is irrelevant. By blogging you have entered a worldwide community of people who create intellectual property. It’s a good rule of thumb not to do anything to them or their work (even if it’s play) that could have consequences you wouldn’t like to experience yourself. Exposure is one thing, and it’s delightful. Being prevented through unpaid overexposure from ever earning even part of a living from any aspect of something you spent a lot of yourself creating is something else, something not so pleasant.

Do you mean, copying an article from somebody else’s website and posting it to your own?

I’d love to see the whole Orion article.

One of my favourite sites, and people.

http://www.pbase.com/dominiccantin/aurora_borealis

Come to think of it, I was thrilled when a nurses’ website linked to a piece I wrote for Orion magazine about urban trees and their health effects (good and bad) and meant to send them the whole ms, since they could only cite the Orion summary; the whole article wasn’t put online, just a teaser. (Just to reinforce your point.)

OTOH, a Napa newspaper ran something that Joe had written for Chris Clarke’s Faultline site — as a “guest editorial” in the paper without Joe’s knowledge, let alone permission. Chris talked to the guy, but Joe never did hear from him, even a “sorry ’bout that.” Dumb fuck, he could’ve had it for free if he’d credited the site.

I’ve let my NWU membership lapse, mostly because we’re both losing venues and we’re jointly broke. That lawsuit, I figure it might help someone someday, maybe. If it helps Ehrenreich, good.

What I was getting at was that fair use rules would allow any jerkoff to quote me in whatever misleading way it wanted to, whether quoting print or pixels. So venue would be less of a consideration than I’d started out thinking.

I’m rambling. G’night.