can you steal what is free?

I just liked the photos, but I regret my enthusiasm in light of all the blowback it caused. I didn't realize that Indybay had such stringent copyright rules and does not want contributions to their site reposted.

I've been logging on to the Indymedia network since 2000, and to be honest, this is the first time I've ever heard of a complaint from reposting on IMC.

To clarify, I am not an editor at SF IMC, or affiliated with any IMC. I read IMC and post news and photos I like from all over the world, wherever I like. I have reposted articles on Indybay and SF IMC whenever I think an interest may arise on many occasions, and most contributors are pleased to see their work disseminated. If not anonymous, I credit the author or artist, and will also repost any copyright statement, should there be one, such as the footnote that accompanies any mainstream press article on internet.

I didn't know reposting was considered forbidden by Indybay, and I do see a lot of reposted articles all over the IMC network. My understanding of copyright for internet may be askew, I guess, but I thought reposting was OK if for educational purposes, and if not for profit. Again, unlike some others, I give proper credit for any repost.

But let's not get paranoid: SF IMC's editors had nothing to do with my posting of Peter Maiden's photos, so there is no need to weave this into the political drama between the groups. Let's avoid the "Indybay is the victim" thing -- so incredibly tired. Since I've read about the battle between the two bay area IMCs for months, and like everyone else, heard of all the power plays and the "stolen" this and that -- this is kind of the last straw.

Indybay should post its uniquely possessive copyright statement on its site since it feels ownership of its content. That's my suggestion, since it apparently has one that is different from the other IMCs. While it may not prevent anything, it might help people understand that Indybay considers itself to own copyright, and does not sanction reposting of contributions to their site.

I am not sure why there is such a fuss: I was not attempting to steal anything, received no remuneration, etc. I gave Peter's full name when reposting, so hopefully that shows my pure intent--I didn't steal the photos for my own glory, just simply reposting on another IMC.

I apologize to Peter Maiden for reposting his photographs, not because it was wrong, but because it bothered him. I apologize to SF IMC -- they certainly didn't need this kind of trouble on one of the busiest days of the year, spam-wise, no doubt.

Thanks for any positive solutions.