Mediapr
Where is a copy of the Unblock Appeal I sent in moments ago?
If you believe a redirect should be deleted, then please start a discussion on WP:RFD. Blanking pages is considered vandalism, and may get you blocked. -Amarkov moo! 20:35, 14 April 2007 (UTC)
I don't see the article being copied from either of the website you have listed, so I have removed the speedy deletion notices. If you believe that the article infringes on your copyright, please list it at Wikipedia:Copyright problems with evidence that this is the case, or contact the Wikipedia Foundation as described on the same page.
Quoting Wikipedia:Copyrights: "Note that copyright law governs the creative expression of ideas, not the ideas or information themselves. Therefore, it is legal to read an encyclopedia article or other work, reformulate the concepts in your own words, and submit it to Wikipedia. However, it would still be unethical (but not illegal) to do so without citing the original as a reference. See plagiarism and fair use for discussions of how much reformulation is necessary in a general context." - Mike Rosoft 23:09, 14 April 2007 (UTC)
NOTE U.S. Copyright office laws do NOT allow for people to extract proprietary information from the owners and reproduce that information in any form whatsoever without first gaining express permission or a license therefrom. The U.S. Patent & Trademark office laws also provides protection to the owners of their marks from random individuals or organizations from using or relating to those marks without the express permission of the marks owners. In this case the tradename and trademark Jerry Calliste Jr. and Hashim Music are owned by myself personally and used to promote myself, Bassmint Music Inc. and Hashim Music (a publishing company member of ASCAP since 1983) respectively. I am NOT allowing the use thereof to anyone one outside of those organizations that have legally purchased the rights to do so. These laws, both copyright and trademark, offer protections and rights for the use of the marks and information, solely to the rightful owners and are in place EXACTLY to protect myself, our organization and others from people such as yourself who would like to take bits and pieces of unlicensed and unfounded information to use for your own purposes. That is illegal and an infringment of my rights and the organizations who purchased the rights from us.
Are you saying you have more rights to post MY information than I do to say I don't want it posted? mediapr 00:19, 15 April 2007 (UTC)User:mediaprmediapr 00:20, 15 April 2007 (UTC)
- Again, I don't see the contents copied from anywhere. You seem to claim that just because the article is about you and your company, you have a right to have it deleted; this is not the case. If you believe you have a case of protection of your copyright, you may contact the Wikimedia Foundation, as described here. Otherwise, you may nominate it for regular deletion; see articles for deletion for the details of the process, but note that we won't delete an article just because you don't like it. See our deletion policy.
Sincerely, Mike Rosoft 08:02, 15 April 2007 (UTC)
- I wonder where This Diff fits into this discussion? - Dan D. Ric 08:14, 15 April 2007 (UTC)
Trademark / Copyright Confusion
editHi, there seems to be confusion about trademarks and copyrights here.
A trademark gives its owner the exclusive right to use the mark in trade. It does not prohibit others from mentioning the mark in contexts other than the sale of goods. Billy Joel's trademark of him name does not mean that newspapers, magazines, websites and other sources cannot mention him without permission. The same is true for the marks at issue here.
Similarly, copyright protects original works of authorship. An artist's compositions are protected by copyright. The text of an artist's website is protected by copyright. Copyright does not give an artist the right to say whether he can or cannot be mentioned by a reviewer, magazine, newspaper or website.
Basically, if you make yourself a public figure, you can't stop the public from writing about you.
Also, your references to a "cease and desist" letter to Wikipedia are problematic, as this may be grounds for banning you indefinitely as a Wikipedia editor. See WP:No_Legal_Threats for more information.
Notability of Bassmint Music Inc.
editA tag has been placed on Bassmint Music Inc. requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. This has been done because the article appears to be about a person, group of people, band, club, company, or web content, but it does not indicate how or why the subject is notable: that is, why an article about that subject should be included in an encyclopedia. Under the criteria for speedy deletion, articles that do not assert the subject's importance or significance may be deleted at any time. Please see the guidelines for what is generally accepted as notable.
If you think that you can assert the notability of the subject, you may contest the deletion by adding {{hangon}} to the top of the page (just below the existing speedy deletion or "db" tag), coupled with adding a note on the article's talk page explaining your position, but be aware that once tagged for speedy deletion, if the article meets the criterion it may be deleted without delay. Please do not remove the speedy deletion tag yourself, but don't hesitate to add information to the article that would confirm the subject's notability under Wikipedia guidelines.
For guidelines on specific types of articles, you may want to check out our criteria for biographies, for web sites, for bands, or for companies. Feel free to leave a note on my talk page if you have any questions about this. WebHamster 19:03, 6 September 2007 (UTC)
August 2011
edit
{{unblock|reason=Your reason here ~~~~}}, but you should read the guide to appealing blocks first. The Cavalry (Message me) 00:09, 19 August 2011 (UTC)(Message me) The properly verifiable "Biography of a Living Person" article Jerry Calliste Jr and our ability to edit the articles I created (redirect Hashim Music, Bassmint Music Inc.) has in my opinion and I believe based on a handful of Wikipedia rules been unfairly and wrongfully "Blocked: Indefinitely" by User/Admin (Message me). This User/Admin in my opinion did not exercise a "reasonable good faith" effort to contact me prior to applying an indefinite block or removing 90% of the articles content.
On the contrary I feel "egregious poor judgment" Was used instead to remove almost 30 years of verifiable and well referenced content of this major contributor and influential American Entrepreneur and Music Executive. No direct e-mail message with the anticipated reason was sent to me prior to User/Admin TheCavalry applying such a drastic action. I am not an expert or completely certain of the Wikipedia rules on Vandalism but this users actions may border upon vandalism. I have reviewed portions of many of the rules including those rules that govern Admin communication, conduct and accountability.
Moments ago I e-mailed User/Admin TheCavalry and asked that the article(s) be reverted back and let's work together to resolve any inaccuracies or mistakes. Patiently waiting for reply, reversal of action and a speedy resolution.
I would also like to request Administration Resolution from a Administrator not associated with either myself or User/Admin.
- (User talk:Mike Rosoft) As an administrator can you please take a hard look at this new situation? If you e-mail me your e-mail address I can provide you with Chase's reply to my initial e-mail to (User talk:Chase ladies, I'm the Cavalry). I have also (Message me).