The critical point of current controversy, that has landfilled up threads, is:
■ Wether 2 channel will take countermeasures against existing Matome affi-blogs that have abused 2 channel's properties,
■ or will continue giving them silent approval of unauthorised uses of 2 channel's properties.
"Existing Matome affi-blogs" here mean the websites depicted in following figure:
http://i.imgur.com/btV6oOp.jpg
As you may know, a lot of Matome affi-blogs have not stopped copyright abuses
even after putting "Prohibition of Reprinting" and "All Rights Reserved" on the names and the top page.
Those Matome affi-bloggers' claims are basically as follows:
1. Jim has never intended to stop existing Matome affi-blogs to use 2 channel properties.
2. By contraries, Jim is encouraging existing Matome affi-blogs.
3. The way existing Matome affi-blogs have been doing is deserve to be what Jim calls "Fair Use".
4. KENMO tricked Jim into putting "転載禁止 (Prohibition of Reprinting)" on the names against his will.
(So that the prohibition is no longer effective.)
5. Thus, existing Matome affi-blogs are eligible to use 2 channel's properties as before.
Could you kindly tell us your direction for this issue?
I understand that it'll be unwanted and open-ended task for you to give a decision to each question about fair use.
But your single statement for this issue will solve most of current controversy about affi-blogs, and rescue this thread from landfilling.
Your cooperation will be highly appreciated.
Best regards,
