78 Week Study 2020-2022 - Instructions

[Grace]

Hi @timtoldrum! Not necessarily too late at all! At some point it may start to get tricky to catch up, but I think we are all taking the approach that ultimately it's a personal study, so decisions about what and how you want to go about it is completely up to you (including how you want to manage the cards from the previous weeks).

 

The group is here to help cheer each other on, and you will notice that we have a few people who started a little later, so you will be in good company!

 

[Gardener]

Hi @timtoldrum - Welcome to the Tough Cookies!  We're very happy to have you, and excited to see a second take on the Leng.

 

Anyone is free to join at any time.  You can start with any card you like and go in any order you like.  Most of us are following a funky flow created by Grace when a few of us claimed to be spiral learners.  I personally love our funky flow, and if you want to be on the same card as the rest of us, that's cool.  Grace's schedule is in the Card Index thread.  You could catch up the earlier cards at the end, why not?

 

We are on Week 8, the Empress.  Week 8 ends this Saturday and we start the Three of Wands Sunday.

 

We are going to have a Zoom call during week 10.  I'm going to propose 5pm US Eastern time on Sunday November 1 and see how many people can make that time.  I know we are a round-the-globe group, so people should please suggest other times that they think might work, or other days.  I know 5pm US Eastern is late for Europe, but it's early for Australia.  The other possibility is late for Australia, I think, as long as there's nobody from the US West coast.

 

Can't wait to see everyone!  Bring your decks!  And your pets!

[katrinka]

51 minutes ago, Gardener said:

We are going to have a Zoom call during week 10.  I'm going to propose 5pm US Eastern time on Sunday November 1 and see how many people can make that time.

 

Just an RSVP - I won't most be there as it's my weekend to work. Or if I do manage to pop in, I can only stay a few minutes since I have to get ready.
I'd set the alarm an hour early, but by Sunday I'm already walking dead and need all the sleep I can get!

[Grace]

58 minutes ago, Gardener said:

We are going to have a Zoom call during week 10.  I'm going to propose 5pm US Eastern time on Sunday November 1 and see how many people can make that time.  I know we are a round-the-globe group, so people should please suggest other times that they think might work, or other days.  I know 5pm US Eastern is late for Europe, but it's early for Australia.  The other possibility is late for Australia, I think, as long as there's nobody from the US West coast.

I'm OK with whatever will work for the majority! I guess we could mix up the time from zoom to zoom if we find too many people are struggling to make it. 

I'm lucky enough to work from home so any time is fine with me. Australia is now in daylight savings, so 5pm EST would make it 9am on Monday for Melbourne, Australia according to the time zone converter (not sure if there are any other Aussies in the Tough Cookies). 

@katrinka I hope we see you there if only for a few minutes! No pressure, I know your work schedule may not allow it every time. Stupid work getting in the way of Tarot! Tsk Tsk. 🤣

[Gardener]

@katrinka  can you suggest 3 dates/times that would work for you?  How about Saturday November 7 at 4pm US Eastern?

[katrinka]

9 minutes ago, Grace said:

@katrinka I hope we see you there if only for a few minutes! No pressure, I know your work schedule may not allow it every time. Stupid work getting in the way of Tarot! Tsk Tsk. 🤣

Just keep in mind that I have alternate weekends off: Off this weekend, work next weekend, off the one after that...
And I work 6PM to 6AM, so I'm nocturnal. 4PM EST works for me since it's 3 PM here and I'm generally up already.
 

7 minutes ago, Gardener said:

@katrinka  can you suggest 3 dates/times that would work for you?  How about Saturday November 7 at 4pm US Eastern?

That would work. I have that Friday, Saturday and Sunday off. 
Times are open. Any time from 4PM EST on, just not earlier than that.

[Guest]

Thank you @Gardener and @Grace.  

 

Due to the current situation and my job, I think it is best at this time for me to decline.  I was supposed to be on leave next week but that is now cancelled.  Sorry.  

[Riimukissa]

I just posted my 2 of Wands but something else got me thinking... Have you guys considered if this is actually allowed according to the copyrights? Because now that I think of it, I don’t think it is... We’re planning to study and share the pictures and the meanings of all the cards in deck. At least Llewellyn states that not more than 25 cards should be shared (unless you pay them). 😕

 

Thoughts?

[katrinka]

On 10/24/2020 at 8:04 AM, timtoldrum said:

Thank you @Gardener and @Grace.  

 

Due to the current situation and my job, I think it is best at this time for me to decline.  I was supposed to be on leave next week but that is now cancelled.  Sorry.  

Aw. Sorry to hear that. 
 

25 minutes ago, Kati said:

I just posted my 2 of Wands but something else got me thinking... Have you guys considered if this is actually allowed according to the copyrights? Because now that I think of it, I don’t think it is... We’re planning to study and share the pictures and the meanings of all the cards in deck. At least Llewellyn states that not more than 25 cards should be shared (unless you pay them). 😕

 

Thoughts?

 

 The stuff I'm using is old and out of copyright, so for me it's a nonissue. But images should be OK if they're small and not usable for printing up a pirate deck.? Does anyone know?

[Grace]

Hmmm. I would have assumed it would fall under the 'fair use' rule.
The whole forum is filled with images of cards, in various contexts - reviews, readings, discussions, including this study. In readings alone, I have probably exceeded my '25 card' limit. 
Some decks would be in the public domain, while newer decks might have their own set on rules.
But you may have a point, and I don't know what the answer is. Maybe an admin could chime in?

[katrinka]

Fair Use can be hard to define. This should help:
https://www.baylor.edu/copyright/index.php?id=56543#:~:text=Copyright Renewal Database-,What is fair use%3F,research and scholarship%2C and teaching.
 

There are some very large scans here dating back several years, and nobody's been dragged to court over them. Still, if one of these companies wants to make trouble, they will. I'm guessing they would send a Cease & Desist before actually suing, and the offending posts could simply be removed. Still, all of this is ultimately up to @Little Fang.

Some of these publishers are nuts. USG used to have a policy of charging Tarot readers a fee of $250 to use their images for online, emailed, or phone(!) readings. That must have gone over like a poo in a punchbowl. I'd never even heard of it until just now when I was looking for more information.

In the meantime, I'd suggest keeping your images small - too small to be printed nicely - and not quoting a large percentage of the text. I know Llewellyn only wants people sharing a percentage of deck images, but they'd look pretty silly dragging someone to court over images the size of a Kit Kat Mini.

A short bit about the meaning should be OK, just not the lengthier information.

Card meanings are what they are. Nobody owns them. If they did, all of us Lenormand readers would have been sued for saying things like "The Rider brings news." 

And do cite your sources - credit where credit is due.

[Guest]

12 hours ago, katrinka said:

Fair Use can be hard to define. This should help:
https://www.baylor.edu/copyright/index.php?id=56543#:~:text=Copyright Renewal Database-,What is fair use%3F,research and scholarship%2C and teaching.
 

There are some very large scans here dating back several years, and nobody's been dragged to court over them. Still, if one of these companies wants to make trouble, they will. I'm guessing they would send a Cease & Desist before actually suing, and the offending posts could simply be removed. Still, all of this is ultimately up to @Little Fang.

Some of these publishers are nuts. USG used to have a policy of charging Tarot readers a fee of $250 to use their images for online, emailed, or phone(!) readings. That must have gone over like a poo in a punchbowl. I'd never even heard of it until just now when I was looking for more information.

In the meantime, I'd suggest keeping your images small - too small to be printed nicely - and not quoting a large percentage of the text. I know Llewellyn only wants people sharing a percentage of deck images, but they'd look pretty silly dragging someone to court over images the size of a Kit Kat Mini.

A short bit about the meaning should be OK, just not the lengthier information.

Card meanings are what they are. Nobody owns them. If they did, all of us Lenormand readers would have been sued for saying things like "The Rider brings news." 

And do cite your sources - credit where credit is due.

Over time it has become extremely complicated and fair use can be somewhat divisive.
 

A few years back, I was told to photograph and watermark the images with the copyright details. 
 

As for the LWB, I thought you were allowed to cite as long as it is was not excessive. I do know one author who claimed copyright over keywords... 

[katrinka]

6 hours ago, timtoldrum said:

Over time it has become extremely complicated and fair use can be somewhat divisive.

 

Yes, and it's kind of subjective. There's no clear limit. 

 

6 hours ago, timtoldrum said:

A few years back, I was told to photograph and watermark the images with the copyright details. 

 

I think that what some of these companies are telling people and what the law actually is might be two different things. 

 

6 hours ago, timtoldrum said:

As for the LWB, I thought you were allowed to cite as long as it is was not excessive.

 

That's the idea, yes. Now if there was just a clear line between "permissible" and "excessive"...

 

6 hours ago, timtoldrum said:

I do know one author who claimed copyright over keywords... 

 

I remember that. If there's any such thing as "pathologically litigious", that person is a textbook case.

All in all, though, I can't think of a forum ever being sued over something like this. As I suspected, they would be asked to remove the offending material:
https://law.stackexchange.com/questions/19746/how-do-community-websites-and-forums-defend-against-copyright-claims

 

[Guest]

23 minutes ago, katrinka said:

 

Yes, and it's kind of subjective. There's no clear limit. 

 

 

I think that what some of these companies are telling people and what the law actually is might be two different things. 

 

 

That's the idea, yes. Now if there was just a clear line between "permissible" and "excessive"...

 

 

I remember that. If there's any such thing as "pathologically litigious", that person is a textbook case.

All in all, though, I can't think of a forum ever being sued over something like this. As I suspected, they would be asked to remove the offending material:
https://law.stackexchange.com/questions/19746/how-do-community-websites-and-forums-defend-against-copyright-claims

 

Yes; subjective is the word. You’re left having to factor in different publishers’ stances (carta Mundi and piatnik are okay, if you credit them and include links to them).  And, as you say, you then have to determine excessive versus permissible - that can vary by deck imho. 
 

When I first started reading for TABI (2003) I would always send a picture to the seeker. That was stopped around 2010, due to copyright; however, I never quite understood what actually changed. Even now, telephone clients ask me to send a picture - especially tableaus.

 

 

 

 

[katrinka]

32 minutes ago, timtoldrum said:

Yes; subjective is the word. You’re left having to factor in different publishers’ stances 

 

And whether they would hold up in court, which might hinge entirely on who the judge turns out to be, and the mood he/she happens to be in that day. 
It really needs to be more clear cut. How can people obey a law if they aren't sure what it is?

Of course, it will probably never go further than a Cease & Desist or a DMCA takedown notice. But it would still be better if there were clear laws.

[Riimukissa]

Here’s what Llewellyn has to say about their Tarot copyright:

 

Quote

Llewellyn and Lo Scarabeo Tarot card images can be used Free of Charge under the following guidelines provided there is proper and complete attribution. Not to exceed 25 cards per each Tarot deck title.

Tarot Deck Reviews. Tarot card images used solely to facilitate or enhance reviews of Tarot decks via print, on-line or interactive or social media not involving Tarot readings.

Tarot Deck Marketing. The reproduction of Tarot card images used solely to advertise or promote the sale of Tarot cards, decks or other products manufactured or distributed by Llewellyn Worldwide.

Electronic Tarot Readings. Including electronic reproduction of Tarot images to display Tarot cards to illustrate the results of email reading services conducted by a person.

Free Tarot education. Instructional materials used to teach about Tarot, including articles, without a commercial aspect and not involving Tarot readings.

 

Sample attribution for Llewellyn Worldwide: Full Deck Title by author and/or artist © year Llewellyn Worldwide, Ltd. 2143 Wooddale Drive, Woodbury, MN 55125. All rights reserved, used by permission.

Sample attribution for Lo Scarabeo: Full Deck Title by author and/or artist © year Lo Scarabeo srl, via Cigna 110, 10155 Torino, Italy. All rights reserved, used by permission.

https://llewellyn.com/about/permissions_tarot.php
 

There’s also guidelines for commercial use and statement: ”Any use of Tarot card images not expressly stated herein are not available.”

[katrinka]

That's their permission for people to post up to 25 cards, but not a legal definition of Fair Use. If Fair Use was that clear, it would simplify things considerably. 

 

I don't know if it has any teeth in the legal sense. People post Lenormand Grand Tableaus all over the internet and I've never heard of anyone even  being asked to take one down. That's 36 cards, 100% of the deck. 

 

On the one hand, piracy stinks and we certainly don't want to provide big, high res scans to deck pirates. But on the other hand, if an image can't be used that way, why wouldn't it be OK? 

 

Maybe we need to ask Ciro or someone like that.

 

[Rupicapra]

Thanks for bringing this up, I have to admit naive little me would have never thought about that.

I wonder how sites like instagram get away with it? 

1 hour ago, katrinka said:

Maybe we need to ask Ciro or someone like that.

good thinking!

[Gardener]

Hello Tough Cookies,

 

Kati raises an excellent point.  My suggestion would be that we post low-resolution pictures going forward.  I love seeing the cards, but we could still get a lot out of each other's posts if we limit ourselves to low-resolution images.

[katrinka]

I agree. Keep them smallish. 
If we want to discuss some tiny detail on the card, we can always add a cropped image from a large scan, similar to this detail from the RWS Chariot. Big enough to be seen, but useless to pirates. 😉

 

[Grace]

Hi All!

 

Just a note of confirmation for anyone that might have missed it, we are moving the inaugural Zoom meeting back one week to the 7th of November.

 

Keep your eyes peeled this week for more information. I can't wait to meet you all!

 

I hope everyone is doing well. Please feel free to post here if you need a little pep talk. I want as many of us Tough Cookie's crossing the finish line as possible! Hopefully our Zoom meetings will help keep the excitement and resolve going!

 

❤️

[katrinka]

The 7th? I can make that one! 

 

[Grace]

That's the assumption I made based on prior discussion! There hasn't been much chatter on that since, so I thought I'd take the liberty to make it a little more official... as I just realised what the date was! 🤣 Time is flying!

[Riimukissa]

Oof, I need to try to catch up. I am taking part in NaNoWriMo so that takes quite much of my time too.

What time was the Zoom meeting again?

[Grace]

Hi @Kati!

At this point it is Saturday, 7th November... 4pm EST.

@Gardener has started a separate post for Zoom and Catch Up purposes. Have a look there as you may have some input and suggestions of your own!