photography documentaries
in [Digital Cameras]
|
From: sobriquet on 24 Jun 2010 13:05 On 24 jun, 14:55, "whisky-dave" <whisky-d...(a)final.front.ear> wrote: > "sobriquet" <dohduh...(a)yahoo.com> wrote in message > > news:4f60acee-4cd5-4dbf-a48f-8b254fe10e7d(a)y11g2000yqm.googlegroups.com... > On 23 jun, 14:55, "Tim Conway" <tconway_...(a)comcast.net> wrote: > > > "sobriquet" <dohduh...(a)yahoo.com> wrote in message > > >news:88615a68-5ef9-4477-8761-507099246983(a)d37g2000yqm.googlegroups.com... > > On 23 jun, 08:22, rfisc...(a)sonic.net (Ray Fischer) wrote: > > > Isn't that what we've been saying all along? I don't want anyone taking my > > photos without my permission. Nor do I yours. > >Then you have to keep your photos of the internet. > > So how do you manage that then. > I';ve seen anything from van goth to rolf harris on the internet. > How would van goth keep his pictures of the internet considering he wasn;t > alive when they were put on it. If they are not alive, they can't object to their creations being shared anyway. > > >If you scatter your > >valuable possessions out on the streets wherever you go, > > Yep, true but we aren't talking aboput peolpe that do that. > I haven;t seen any software vender just throw their software out on the > street. There software is freely available on p2p networks anyway, so if they had wanted their software to remain in their possession, they shouldn't have published their software, because that way it inevitably ends up on p2p networks. > > I've seen BP empty millions of barrels of oil in to the gulf but no ones > rushing to take it home. > > >you can't > >expect the police to help protect your possessions. > > Same goes for > >photos. If you don't want anyone taking your photos without your > >permission then you shouldn't allow them to end up in the hands of > >others. > > What if someone comes in to your home and takes your photos. Well.. owning physical property is a human right and I'm an advocate of human rights. So if people break into my house, I can go to the police and report the crime and hopefully they are willing to help and find the perpetrators. > > > If you simply keep your photos to yourself, nobody will break > >into your house to obtain a copy of your photos to share with others. > > They would if they thought they were worth anything, have you ever been > broken in to ? If they break into my house, I don't care that much if they take my pictures or other digital content, because I have several copies in several locations. So it's unlikely they will break into all places and take all copies.
From: sobriquet on 24 Jun 2010 13:07 On 24 jun, 17:40, Pete <available.on.requ...(a)aserver.invalid> wrote: > On 2010-06-24 14:17:41 +0100, Floyd L. Davidson said: > > > > > > > Pete <available.on.requ...(a)aserver.invalid> wrote: > >> On 2010-06-24 13:11:53 +0100, Floyd L. Davidson said: > > >>> Pete <available.on.requ...(a)aserver.invalid> wrote: > >>>> The form of the notice is important. If Barney adds > >>>> the notice (c) B > >>>> Rubble it informs the reader that Barney hasn't bothered to take the > >>>> first step in protecting his work and it's very unlikely that Barney > >>>> will be able to defend his rights. > >>>>http://www.copyrightservice.co.uk/copyright/p03_copyright_notices > >>> You should have read the material you cited, because it > >>> is 1) correct, and 2) contradicts what you say. > > >> I fail to see the contradiction because (c) is not a recognized symbol > >> and Barney did not put a date on his notice. > > > You said: > > > "The form of the notice is important." > > > And then claim that the wrong form has legal > > implications because, "it informs the reader that Barney > > hasn't bothered to take the first step in protecting his > > work and it's very unlikely that Barney will be able to > > defend his rights." > > > The cited URL says (right up at the top): > > > " Do I need a notice? > > > There is no legal requirement to include a copyright > > notice. Whether a notice is used or not will not > > change the fact that copyright exists in the work. It > > is however strongly recommended that you include one > > on your work if all all possible to deter copyright > > infringement. > > > The aim of copyright notice is to: > > > * Make it clear that the work is subject to copyright. > > * Provide a means of identifying the copyright owner. > > * Deter infringement or plagiarism." > > > Clearly not applying a legal notice that is not required > > will not have the effect you suggest; never mind just > > eliminating the date which isn't even listed as part of > > the "aim" of applying the notice. > > > Clearly the notice is just a message for anyone who > > might be thinking of ignoring copyright law, and has not > > legal status at all in most countries. The example you > > cited is simply incorrect. (There are some variations, > > and phrases such as "All rights reserved" do have legal > > status and meaning in some situations on an > > international basis.) > > Is this the five minute argument or the full half hour? > > -- > Pete What does it matter.. any copyright claim is completely irrelevant anyway. A copyright claim is not going to stop anyone from sharing your work on p2p. So you might as well claim that you're the ruler of the universe and it would be equally inconsequential as people will ignore such spurious claims anyway.
From: Ray Fischer on 25 Jun 2010 03:04 sobriquet <dohduhdah(a)yahoo.com> wrote: > You have a point, my language comprehension skills are indeed somewhat > limited. No kidding? You're also a sleazy liar and bereft of any morals. -- Ray Fischer rfischer(a)sonic.net
From: Ray Fischer on 25 Jun 2010 03:06 sobriquet <dohduhdah(a)yahoo.com> wrote: > rfisc...(a)sonic.net (Ray Fischer) wrote: >> >Ok, so show me a picture >> >> So that you can steal it, thief? > >Try and take away this bitstring: 101011110001 > >If you can't, you You really lost the argument when you starting blatantly lying about what people write. You have no credibility and no morals. You're just a slimy thief. -- Ray Fischer rfischer(a)sonic.net
From: Ray Fischer on 25 Jun 2010 03:08
sobriquet <dohduhdah(a)yahoo.com> wrote: >> Isn't that what we've been saying all along? �I don't want anyone taking my >> photos without my permission. �Nor do I yours. > >Then you have to keep your photos of the internet. And if you don't want your wallet stolen then don't carry it with you. Don't want your car stolen? Don't leave it where a thief can get at it. > If you scatter your >valuable possessions out on the streets wherever you go, you can't >expect the police to help protect your possessions. The thief always finds rationalizations for its crimes. -- Ray Fischer rfischer(a)sonic.net |