Electrical certification for imported goods

[KS]

Dear "Brian Withers"

We do know that "Fred Smith" claims to have registration.

Look at


http://groups.google.com/groups?hl=en&lr=&ie=UTF-8&oe=UTF-8&th=99fad6b86cc3a7b6&rnum=1

Given the header of the e-mail carried that well known line

Received: from roger(203-79-83-241.cable.paradise.net.nz
[203.79.83.241]) by smtp-2.paradise.net.nz

the conclusion was inescapable!

The Electricity Act 1992 contains the following:

........

160.Offences relating to registration

snip

Nice Malcolm.

Perhaps that should be a new thread on its own ?

 

[K]

On Fri, 16 Jan 2004 01:55:14 +0100, "Uncle StoatWarbler"
<alanb+google4@digistar.com> wrote:

Sorry to butt in here guys, but according to my husband ( who IS a
registered Electrical Inspector) anyone holding any form of Electrical
registration is on the Register of Electrical Workers. found here
http://www.ewr.govt.nz/pls/web/dbssiten.main just click on Electrical
workers register and then search for Roger Sheppard or whoever he
claims to be.

On Sat, 10 Jan 2004 23:20:11 +1300, K & S wrote:

The Standards here are a Utter Joke I should know I have to service this
Crap..

Now that you've got that admission off your chest Woger, whatever happened
to your electrical serviceman registration?

Oh that's right, you never had one...

I'd really hate to be your employer. Sooner or later someone's going to
tip off the ERB and they will be facing large fines as a sresult.

 

[Jim James]

KS <ivabiggun@hotmail.com> wrote in message
news:bueq74$sg5$1@lust.ihug.co.nz...

However, *I* own the copyright to the JPG image that I posted
onto the website - *I* made that scan. It is *my* certificate, having
been unreservedly given it by the Polytechnic at which I studied.

Lennier, you are absolutely correct (except for owning the copyright to
the *logo* on the certificate, which of course still belongs to the Polytech.
That means you can't claim it as your own work, or ownership).

The logo has been released to the public domain by printing it and giving
it to you as an item that it is expected to be reproduced and displayed.

That is NOT what public domain means.

The mere use of a logo on ads etc does
NOT change its copyright status one iota.

You are however welcome to take photos that include a publicly
displayed logo without that being an infringement of the copyright
whose status is NOT affected by the public display of the logo etc.

Therefore you ARE allowed to display the item publically, as you were doing.

There is no 'therefore' involved.

As I mentioned, there's a lot of misconceptions about
copyright and what you are and are not allowed to do.

Yep, and you are guilty of that yourself.

What you are doing is correct. No lawyer with half a brain
could argue against the public display of a certificate.

Indeed, but it isnt for the reason you claim.

 

[Mainlander]

In article <pan.2004.01.18.15.15.12.211974@TRACKER>,
notanyspam@nospam.invalid says...

On Sun, 18 Jan 2004 21:40:05 +1100, Rod Speed wrote:

David claims he owns the copyright on that document, but he doesn't.

Irrelevant to whether he infringes copyright by displaying a scan
of his certificate on his web site. He doesnt, even in NZ.

Point of fact:

I never claimed that I owned the copyright for any logos, signatures, or
any other individual copyrighted item that may form a part of my
certificate.

However, *I* own the copyright to the JPG image that I posted onto the
website - *I* made that scan. It is *my* certificate, having been
unreservedly given it by the Polytechnic at which I studied.

Doesn't matter whether you scanned it or not. If the copyright on the
document is owned by someone else, scanning it for reproduction still
rides over their copyrights.

Provided I reproduce that document as a
whole, and use it for the purposes for which the document was intended -
namely to prove that I have passed that course - then I am quite within my
rights to reproduce my certificate - either by scanning or by photocopying
(same thing really) and to use those reproductions accordingly.

But you went further, and asserted you owned the copyright of that image.

Basically, Patrick Dunford (Fundamentalist that he is) doesn't know
nothing about what he's talking!

You don't know "nothing" about the English Language, eh David?

--
Full featured open source Win32 newsreader - Gravity 2.70
http://sourceforge.net/projects/mpgravity/

 

[Mainlander]

In article <bueq74$sg5$1@lust.ihug.co.nz>, ivabiggun@hotmail.com says...

However, *I* own the copyright to the JPG image that I posted onto the
website - *I* made that scan. It is *my* certificate, having been
unreservedly given it by the Polytechnic at which I studied.

Lennier, you are absolutely correct (except for owning the copyright to the
*logo* on the certificate, which of course still belongs to the Polytech.
That means you can't claim it as your own work, or ownership).

The logo has been released to the public domain by printing it and giving it
to you as an item that it is expected to be reproduced and displayed.
Therefore you ARE allowed to display the item publically, as you were doing.

As I mentioned, there's a lot of misconceptions about copyright and what you
are and are not allowed to do.

What you are doing is correct. No lawyer with half a brain could argue
against the public display of a certificate.

I'm not arguing against his public display. I'm arguing against his
assertion that he owns the copyright on the scanned image of his
certificate.

--
Full featured open source Win32 newsreader - Gravity 2.70
http://sourceforge.net/projects/mpgravity/

 

[Rod Speed]

"Mainlander" <*@*.*> wrote in message news:MPG.1a75d34bdb4f66a598a50a@news.paradise.net.nz...

In article <pan.2004.01.18.15.15.12.211974@TRACKER>,
notanyspam@nospam.invalid says...
On Sun, 18 Jan 2004 21:40:05 +1100, Rod Speed wrote:

David claims he owns the copyright on that document, but he doesn't.

Irrelevant to whether he infringes copyright by displaying a scan
of his certificate on his web site. He doesnt, even in NZ.

Point of fact:

I never claimed that I owned the copyright for any logos, signatures, or
any other individual copyrighted item that may form a part of my
certificate.

However, *I* own the copyright to the JPG image that I posted onto the
website - *I* made that scan. It is *my* certificate, having been
unreservedly given it by the Polytechnic at which I studied.

Doesn't matter whether you scanned it or not. If the
copyright on the document is owned by someone else,
scanning it for reproduction still rides over their copyrights.

Wrong again. It DOES NOT infringe the copyright in this particular situation.

Just like it doesnt if you photograph a billboard containing
a logo or an ad and publish that anywhere you like either.

Provided I reproduce that document as a
whole, and use it for the purposes for which the document was intended -
namely to prove that I have passed that course - then I am quite within my
rights to reproduce my certificate - either by scanning or by photocopying
(same thing really) and to use those reproductions accordingly.

But you went further, and asserted you owned the copyright of that image.

Irrelevant what he claims as far as copyright infringement is concerned.

Basically, Patrick Dunford (Fundamentalist that he is) doesn't know
nothing about what he's talking!

You don't know "nothing" about the English Language, eh David?

 

[Rod Speed]

"Mainlander" <*@*.*> wrote in message news:MPG.1a75d3a039b5b52898a50b@news.paradise.net.nz...

In article <bueq74$sg5$1@lust.ihug.co.nz>, ivabiggun@hotmail.com says...
However, *I* own the copyright to the JPG image that I posted onto the
website - *I* made that scan. It is *my* certificate, having been
unreservedly given it by the Polytechnic at which I studied.

Lennier, you are absolutely correct (except for owning the copyright to the
*logo* on the certificate, which of course still belongs to the Polytech.
That means you can't claim it as your own work, or ownership).

The logo has been released to the public domain by printing it and giving it
to you as an item that it is expected to be reproduced and displayed.
Therefore you ARE allowed to display the item publically, as you were doing.

As I mentioned, there's a lot of misconceptions about copyright and what you
are and are not allowed to do.

What you are doing is correct. No lawyer with half a brain could argue
against the public display of a certificate.

I'm not arguing against his public display.

Liar, you initially did just that.

It's *my* certificate - I'll do what I like with
it, so long as nobody is abused or defamed.

The design and some symbols / logos that are
undoubtedly copyrighted to Tai Poutini Polytech.

Completely irrelevant to whether you are welcome to scan
your certificate and post it on your web site or wherever.

If someone else holds the copyright, you can't
publish the document without their permission.

WRONG in this particular situation being discussed.

I'm arguing against his assertion that he owns the
copyright on the scanned image of his certificate.

You are attempting that NOW, after you nose was
rubbed in your complete pig ignorance of copyright law.

And whatever he claims, doesnt alter the FACT that
its perfectly legal for him to display his certificate on
his web site if he wants to. Even in NZ

 

[Lennier]

On Mon, 19 Jan 2004 09:27:33 +1300, KS wrote:

Lennier, you are absolutely correct (except for owning the copyright to the
*logo* on the certificate, which of course still belongs to the Polytech.
That means you can't claim it as your own work, or ownership).

You will find that this is exactly what I have already said.


Lennier

--
Newsman - on CD piracy: "Entertainment meets Geekery meets Vengeance. It's
unstoppable. A match made in Heaven."

 

[Lennier]

On Mon, 19 Jan 2004 10:57:57 +1100, Rod Speed wrote:

I'm arguing against his assertion that he owns the
copyright on the scanned image of his certificate.

You are attempting that NOW, after you nose was
rubbed in your complete pig ignorance of copyright law.

I *DO* own the right to copy my certificate. I do own the copyright over
my certificate. *I* own the original of that certificate - it is mine to
do what I like with it.

To argue that I cannot duplicate it for my own purposes is, frankly,
absurd.

If I wish to duplicate it 250,000,000,000 times and post it to every
business in the known universe then it is within my right to do so. (would
be stupid to do but nevertheless within my right.) And nobody else has the
right to duplicate my certificate. All rights to the use of my
certificate were granted to me when I was given that certificate. The
polytechnic of course has the right to produce another original if
necessary, and if it so chose to do.

I was not granted the use of any logos that were used by the polytechnic
when they created my certificate. I was granted the unrestricted use of my
certificate as a whole.

Patrick Dunford is a Fundamentalist idiot. He should go back to his "bible
study" - it'll keep him occupied and not doing anything else stupid.


Lennier

--
Brian Valentine - Microsoft's SVP for Windows development: "We
really haven't done everything we could to protect our customers. Our
products just aren't engineered for security."

 

[T.N.O. - Dave.net.nz]

Lennier wrote:

To argue that I cannot duplicate it for my own purposes is, frankly,
absurd.

Legally you may have to get copies signed off by a lawyer as to their
authenicity... much like a birth certificate.

I was not granted the use of any logos that were used by the polytechnic
when they created my certificate. I was granted the unrestricted use of my
certificate as a whole.

You were? got a copy of that in writing?

--
Dave Hall
http://Dave.net.nz
We have Hangman, Pacman, and Space Invaders

 

[Carl Elphick]

"K & S" <ks@electronics.co.au> wrote in message
news:ll1h00dllhpvcfqt7uhmhhcu4vk4ko16bi@4ax.com...

Don't have to be registered to work on modern PCs



Yes you DO as ou are in contact with 240v..

Umm no you don't.
I built my computer with no electrical cert.

 

[Lennier]

On Mon, 19 Jan 2004 15:07:40 +1300, T.N.O. - Dave.net.nz wrote:

I was not granted the use of any logos that were used by the polytechnic
when they created my certificate. I was granted the unrestricted use of my
certificate as a whole.

You were? got a copy of that in writing?

No.

However, it absolutely and unqualifiedly gave it to me. The Polytechnic
made no restrictions whatsoever as to what I can do with my certificate.

"Silence means consent."

Now, so long as I do not forge those documents - do not create something
that is not legitimately mine, I am quite within my rights.

The idea that I cannot duplicate my own certificate to demonstrate what I
have attained is absurd.


Lennier

--
"When dealing with the Religious Right one should remember that 'truth'
is not a part of the rules of their game."

 

[Phil Allison]

"Lennier"

The idea that I cannot duplicate my own certificate to demonstrate what I
have attained is absurd.

** Showing that silly scrap of paper around in Australia would only
provoke fits of laughter.

I suggest you keep it well hidden.




........... Phil

 

[Lennier]

On Mon, 19 Jan 2004 13:57:24 +1100, Phil Allison wrote:

Showing that silly scrap of paper around in Australia would only
provoke fits of laughter.

Most likely because Australians are dumber even than Americans!

<plonk!>


Lennier

--
Newsman - on CD piracy: "Entertainment meets Geekery meets Vengeance. It's
unstoppable. A match made in Heaven."

 

[Rod Speed]

Lennier <notanyspam@nospam.invalid> wrote in message
newsan.2004.01.19.01.52.59.288939@TRACKER...

Rod Speed wrote

I'm arguing against his assertion that he owns the
copyright on the scanned image of his certificate.

You are attempting that NOW, after you nose was
rubbed in your complete pig ignorance of copyright law.

I *DO* own the right to copy my certificate.

Nope, you aint the author or creator of it.

It just happens to have your name on it.

You didnt even write your name on it.

I do own the copyright over my certificate.

Nope, you aint the author or creator of it.

It just happens to have your name on it.

You didnt even write your name on it.

*I* own the original of that certificate

Separate issue entirely to who owns the copyright.

If you buy say a copyrighted paperback, you certainly
own that particular copy. You do NOT have any copyright
over it whatever, even if you say write you name inside
the cover. Basically because what you have written
inside it is not a creative work at all, its just your name.

If you say write an original poem you dreamt up inside the
front cover, you certainly own the copyright to THAT, but not
to anything the author and publisher of the book produced.

- it is mine to do what I like with it.

Separate issue entirely to who owns the copyright.

To argue that I cannot duplicate it for
my own purposes is, frankly, absurd.

Yes, you are welcome to do that if you
want to, say when applying for a job etc.

If I wish to duplicate it 250,000,000,000 times and post it to
every business in the known universe then it is within my right to
do so. (would be stupid to do but nevertheless within my right.)

Correct.

And nobody else has the right to duplicate my certificate.

Thats distinctly arguable and if they dont, it aint because
you have copyright over anything to do with it. You created
NOTHING to do with that certificate, you didnt even write
your name on it. And you cant even copyright a personal name
if you say chose to bin what your parents chose to give you.

All rights to the use of my certificate were
granted to me when I was given that certificate.

Correct.

The polytechnic of course has the right to produce
another original if necessary, and if it so chose to do.

Correct.

I was not granted the use of any logos that were used
by the polytechnic when they created my certificate. I was
granted the unrestricted use of my certificate as a whole.

Correct, even when they retain copyright over the design of it.

Patrick Dunford is a Fundamentalist idiot.

Correct.

He should go back to his "bible study"

It'd be better if he just topped himself.

- it'll keep him occupied and not doing anything else stupid.

Topping himself would at least silence him if he doesnt botch it.

 

[Rod Speed]

T.N.O. - Dave.net.nz <news@dave.net.nz> wrote in message
news:bufe6g$h80ih$1@ID-183327.news.uni-berlin.de...

Lennier wrote:

To argue that I cannot duplicate it for my
own purposes is, frankly, absurd.

Legally you may have to get copies signed off by a
lawyer as to their authenicity... much like a birth certificate.

Nope, at most that may be something some potential employers
would like to see. In practice anyone with a clue just checks
with the issuer of the purported certificate if they doubt that
the individual is telling lies about being entitled to one.

I was not granted the use of any logos that were used
by the polytechnic when they created my certificate. I was
granted the unrestricted use of my certificate as a whole.

You were? got a copy of that in writing?

Dont need to, that what certificates are about, legally.

 

[T.N.O. - Dave.net.nz]

Lennier wrote:

I was not granted the use of any logos that were used by the polytechnic
when they created my certificate. I was granted the unrestricted use of my
certificate as a whole.

You were? got a copy of that in writing?

No.
However, it absolutely and unqualifiedly gave it to me. The Polytechnic
made no restrictions whatsoever as to what I can do with my certificate.
"Silence means consent."

<mind slips to the gutter> really? I don't think that, that would hold
up in court</mind in the gutter>

my comment was kinda tounge in cheak... you appear to have assumed that
you could make copies, without actually checking.

I happen to agree with you, I would think that it is entirely
possible/legal etc to do so, but, I'm only guessing.

--
Http://www.Dave.net.nz
Play Hangman
Register, and play Space Invaders or Pacman.

 

[T.N.O. - Dave.net.nz]

Lennier wrote:

Most likely because Australians are dumber even than Americans!

I find that hard to believe... the yanks are really really dumb.

--
Http://www.Dave.net.nz
Play Hangman
Register, and play Space Invaders or Pacman.

 

[Lennier]

On Mon, 19 Jan 2004 15:51:03 +1100, Rod Speed wrote:

I do own the copyright over my certificate.

Nope, you aint the author or creator of it.

I have the right to make as many copies of my certificate as I please.

I have the COPY-RIGHT - the RIGHT to COPY my certificate. I possess the
rights to copy that certificate any way I please. In fact nobody else can
copy that certificate.

The fact that I am not the author of the certificate is immaterial - the
ownership of the copyright to that particular certificate has been granted
to me, along with ownership of the certificate itself.

If this were not so then I would not legally be able to duplicate it.


Lennier

--
Newsman - on CD piracy: "Entertainment meets Geekery meets Vengeance. It's
unstoppable. A match made in Heaven."

 

[Lennier]

On Mon, 19 Jan 2004 18:59:16 +1300, T.N.O. - Dave.net.nz wrote:

I was not granted the use of any logos that were used by the polytechnic
when they created my certificate. I was granted the unrestricted use of my
certificate as a whole.

You were? got a copy of that in writing?

No.
However, it absolutely and unqualifiedly gave it to me. The Polytechnic
made no restrictions whatsoever as to what I can do with my certificate.
"Silence means consent."

mind slips to the gutter> really? I don't think that, that would hold
up in court</mind in the gutter

my comment was kinda tounge in cheak... you appear to have assumed that
you could make copies, without actually checking.

I happen to agree with you, I would think that it is entirely
possible/legal etc to do so, but, I'm only guessing.

"Silence means Consent" is a legal principle. The fact that the
Polytechnic has not specifically refused me the permission to duplicate
the certificate means that, as possessor of the original said certificate
and of all rights to the use of the said certificate, I and none other
have the copyright over it.

Frankly, unless someone steals it from me it would be quite impossible for
someone else to make copies of it.


Lennier

--
Brian Valentine - Microsoft's SVP for Windows development: "We
really haven't done everything we could to protect our customers. Our
products just aren't engineered for security."