Go Back   Rangefinderforum.com > Cameras / Gear / Photography > Rangefinder Forum > Photography General Interest

Photography General Interest Neat Photo stuff NOT particularly about Rangefinders.

Reply
 
Thread Tools Search this Thread Display Modes

Old 01-29-2014   #81
wolves3012
Registered User
 
wolves3012's Avatar
 
wolves3012 is offline
Join Date: Sep 2006
Location: Wolverhampton, UK
Age: 62
Posts: 2,808
Quote:
Originally Posted by Sejanus.Aelianus View Post
I am put in mind of something I read a long time ago: "a law that cannot be be enforced in the majority of cases is a bad law". No matter what you call it, "infringement" or "theft", how do you enforce the rights that current law gives you?

The truth is, I submit, you cannot. Even huge corporations, such as Sony Entertainment or Microsoft, can only recover damages in a tiny fraction of cases, by their own admission. In some countries, such as Armenia, it has been claimed that as much as 93% of the intellectual property available is "pirated" and that in China, the figure could be 89%.

Before you can begin the process of recovering "lost income", you need to identify that someone has copied your image without permission. How do you find this has happened, how do you identify the legal jurisdiction in which the alleged loss occurred and how do you provide whatever proof of loss will be required in that jurisdiction? If the defendant is in the same country or state as yourself, it will be time consuming, expensive and, as always in the law, a test of stamina between yourself and the defendant. If it is in another jurisdiction?

This is why I say that the only thing a sensible person can and should do is decide if they wish to keep control of their images or not. If they do wish to keep control of their images, in my opinion, they should never post them on the web or post them in such a way that most people won't consider re-using those images.
Probably the most sensible post in this thread!

Like it or not, once something is uploaded onto the internet, the very nature of that medium means you've lost control of it. Complaining about ethics, morals or laws solves nothing. I don't condone theft, infringement or whatever else it's called but there is, currently, no practical solution.

If the entire world were a single nation and every user's upload/downloads monitored there might be a chance but that isn't going to happen any time soon.
__________________
Zorki: 1e (x2), 2C, 3M, 4, 4K, 5, 6
FED: NKVD, 1g, 2e
Kiev 4, 4A
Leica IIIC
Yashica Minister III
Zenith C, Zenit C, Zenit E
Minolta XG-M, XD-5
Nikon P50
Panasonic Lumix G2, 14-42 Kit lens + 45-150mm

"The way to see by faith is to shut the eye of reason." - Benjamin Franklin
  Reply With Quote

Old 01-29-2014   #82
Thardy
Registered User
 
Thardy is offline
Join Date: Apr 2007
Posts: 2,180
Below is the official definition of author of an original work, copyright, what copyright means and the definition of infringement.

Infringement is basically using someone else's work WITHOUT their permission. This is from a dot.gov site. NOT WIKIPEDIA.

http://www.copyright.gov/help/faq/faq-definitions.html
__________________
Thomas

Flickr

Tumblr
  Reply With Quote

Welcome to the 21st Century
Old 01-29-2014   #83
Dektol Dan
Registered User
 
Dektol Dan is offline
Join Date: Jun 2007
Posts: 922
Welcome to the 21st Century

1. Exposure is necessary to sell visual, musical, or literary art.
2. This ALWAYS comes with a price (money to publisher or record company), both yesterday and today.
3. Yesterday, one's work was posted in print or in a gallery for that necessary exposure; today one posts on the internet.
4. The minimum cost for an infringement suit that can claim damages to the creator is now $100,000 as per ASCAP's site.
5. Although copyrights and patents are designed to protect the creators, historically the money goes to whomever gets the idea to market successfully.

Today what folks used to call 'infringement' is just the cost of doing business, and copyright can provide cease and desist orders, or damages if they can be accounted.

OTHERWISE, stop yer damn whining! Your exposure is FREE!!! This is the 21st Century!!!!
  Reply With Quote

Old 01-29-2014   #84
presspass
filmshooter
 
presspass is offline
Join Date: Jul 2008
Location: Lancaster County, Pennsylvania
Posts: 1,200
Which is why I don't put photos I care about on the internet. I publish, in a printed newspaper, anywhere from 10 to 20 photos a week. Most of them also get posted on our website. I don't put any pictures I don't want copied on the internet. So Dektol Dan's argument flies with me. I still call it theft - it's mine to do with as a choose. And I choose not to post some photos.
  Reply With Quote

Old 01-29-2014   #85
Ronald M
Registered User
 
Ronald M is offline
Join Date: Aug 2005
Posts: 4,486
It is wrong, but lets face it. You make the image and put it where it can be stolen with little problem and then blame the thief.

I would not do it, but this is so easy and times are bad.

Perhaps some smart programer could make an image melt if downloaded.
  Reply With Quote

Old 01-29-2014   #86
noisycheese
Normal(ish) Human
 
noisycheese is offline
Join Date: Mar 2013
Posts: 1,279
Quote:
... but this is so easy and times are bad...
Neither of which legitimizes or justifies theft. It is still amazing to me that so many here are deaf,dumb and blind to that inconvenient fact.
__________________
The Leica M passion: From the inside it's hard to explain; from the outside it's hard to understand.
  Reply With Quote

Old 01-29-2014   #87
back alley
IMAGES
 
back alley's Avatar
 
back alley is offline
Join Date: Jul 2003
Location: true north strong & free
Posts: 49,132
is this thread EVER going to die?
  Reply With Quote

Old 01-29-2014   #88
Thardy
Registered User
 
Thardy is offline
Join Date: Apr 2007
Posts: 2,180
[quote=back alley;2294856]is this thread EVER going to die?[/QUOTE

If it were one of those "let's agree to disagree" type of topics I'd say yes. But some people like to make up their own definitions of things which have already been defined.
__________________
Thomas

Flickr

Tumblr
  Reply With Quote

Old 01-29-2014   #89
Roger Hicks
Registered User
 
Roger Hicks is offline
Join Date: Apr 2005
Location: Aquitaine
Posts: 23,947
Quote:
Originally Posted by Thardy View Post
Quote:
Originally Posted by back alley View Post
is this thread EVER going to die?
If it were one of those "let's agree to disagree" type of topics I'd say yes. But some people like to make up their own definitions of things which have already been defined.
Dear Thomas,

Definitions change: they are not frozen for all time. That's part of the nature of debate. And the point of this particular debate is who has what rights, and how enforceable those rights are. Does it matter whether we label copyright infringement as theft? Not really. Does it matter that so many people have so little respect for intellectual property rights? Yes.

Cheers,

R.
  Reply With Quote

Old 01-30-2014   #90
Roger Hicks
Registered User
 
Roger Hicks is offline
Join Date: Apr 2005
Location: Aquitaine
Posts: 23,947
Quote:
Originally Posted by Sejanus.Aelianus View Post
Isn't this in danger of becoming like the old Scottish joke: "Och, look at aw they sodgers. They're aw' oot a step, 'cept oor Wullie."

As you say, Definitions change, as do social norms and the laws that seek to enforce them. It wasn't long ago that a British citizen who used force to stop an intruder could, and did, end up in prison. Now the law has changed to make that much less likely. So, the definitions of theft and infringement may well change. If and when they do, I think there will be both winners and losers. I, for one, am not going to make any foolish predictions as to who will fall into each category.
That was in turn the case for a relatively short time. At law school in the 1960s/early 70 I was taught about Levett's case, K.B. 1638, and "self defence" was still quite generously interpreted.

You are of course right about winners and losers, but the important thing is that there should be a debate, rather than a blinkered view that "It's like this right now, so this is the way it's always going to be", sometimes further blinkered by the assumption that all jurisdictions are the same.

Cheers,

R.
  Reply With Quote

Old 01-30-2014   #91
Jamie123
Registered User
 
Jamie123 is offline
Join Date: Nov 2005
Posts: 2,783
Quote:
Originally Posted by Roger Hicks View Post
Does it matter that so many people have so little respect for intellectual property rights? Yes.
I truly don't think it's malicious, though. In my experience it's not so much a lack of respect as it is a lack of understanding. That's why I don't think it helps to give simplistic answers and just say it's stealing. It's like some ads that ran a while ago that said something along the lines of "you wouldn't steal a dvd at the store so why would steal a movie online if it's the same thing?". But if people do one thing and not the other then obviously there is a difference. It's like trying to convince someone that oranges are apples. Even if they agree they will still see a difference between the different kinds of apples. (As a side note, an old German term for orange is "apple of china".)
  Reply With Quote

Old 01-30-2014   #92
Roger Hicks
Registered User
 
Roger Hicks is offline
Join Date: Apr 2005
Location: Aquitaine
Posts: 23,947
Quote:
Originally Posted by Jamie123 View Post
I truly don't think it's malicious, though. In my experience it's not so much a lack of respect as it is a lack of understanding. That's why I don't think it helps to give simplistic answers and just say it's stealing. . . .
Highlight: you are almost certainly right. The question is, how do we promote understanding? Calling it "stealing" is probably something more people can understand, on a more visceral level. The trick lies in getting that across without ranting. There are those who, when they see the word "intellectual" in the term "intellectual property" will immediately and automatically put themselves on the other side from "pointy-headed innerlekshuls".

Cheers,

R.
  Reply With Quote

Old 01-30-2014   #93
sig
Registered User
 
sig is offline
Join Date: Nov 2009
Posts: 552
I believe that lying and making copyright infringement "more bad" than it is by calling it stealing does not help (assuming the goal is trying to change peoples behavior)
Why should people listen to a message that is a lie?

When people are told they are doing something wrong, they will be skeptical about the messenger and the message. And everything the messenger/message is doing wrong (like lying) will make the message easy to ignore.
  Reply With Quote

Old 01-30-2014   #94
Sparrow
Registered User
 
Sparrow's Avatar
 
Sparrow is offline
Join Date: Feb 2006
Location: Perfidious Albion
Age: 67
Posts: 12,451
I've used this in the past to good effect here in the UK, feel free to use it, but only on the understanding that I have no legal insurance so cannot take any responsibility if it all goes <bad> cease and desist letter
__________________
Regards Stewart

Stewart McBride

RIP 2015



You’re only young once, but one can always be immature.

flickr stuff
  Reply With Quote

Old 01-30-2014   #95
Photo_Smith
Registered User
 
Photo_Smith's Avatar
 
Photo_Smith is offline
Join Date: May 2012
Posts: 1,480
Quote:
Originally Posted by Ronald M View Post
It is wrong, but lets face it. You make the image and put it where it can be stolen with little problem and then blame the thief.
I would not do it, but this is so easy and times are bad.
.
It is wrong, but if I leave my car door unlocked and leave my sunnies on the dashboard is it Ok to just take them?
It was easy to take them and times are bad–do these thing make it OK?

It may be a generational thing, i buy CD's LPs and downloads if I want music. A young colleague has never bought a CD but has a 1TB drive with 'all the music I could ever want' doesn't see it as wrong because everyone does it and I probably don't like the stuff enough to buy it, so if he didn't download it he'd just listen on Youtube.

What I think is worse than downloading images is claiming them as yours, that's not just infringing/stealing but also deceit, and could fool a potential client into thinking you could have taken it.

Life is changing. people now no longer value music as an object (CD, LP) they think of pictures in the same way.

On the internet the perception is it's all free, as much as you can eat.
  Reply With Quote

Old 01-30-2014   #96
Thardy
Registered User
 
Thardy is offline
Join Date: Apr 2007
Posts: 2,180
Quote:
Originally Posted by Photo_Smith View Post
It is wrong, but if I leave my car door unlocked and leave my sunnies on the dashboard is it Ok to just take them?
It was easy to take them and times are bad–do these thing make it OK?

It may be a generational thing, i buy CD's LPs and downloads if I want music. A young colleague has never bought a CD but has a 1TB drive with 'all the music I could ever want' doesn't see it as wrong because everyone does it and I probably don't like the stuff enough to buy it, so if he didn't download it he'd just listen on Youtube.

What I think is worse than downloading images is claiming them as yours, that's not just infringing/stealing but also deceit, and could fool a potential client into thinking you could have taken it.

Life is changing. people now no longer value music as an object (CD, LP) they think of pictures in the same way.

On the internet the perception is it's all free, as much as you can eat.

I read a post on Overgaard's FB page about "finding" things in his country. You leave your bag full of expensive gear on your seat at that charming cafe, remember it and run back to find it gone.

The finder says "oh what luck, I've found some great stuff, look what some careless person left behind".

He wondered if that line of thinking was wrong.
__________________
Thomas

Flickr

Tumblr
  Reply With Quote

Old 01-30-2014   #97
Photo_Smith
Registered User
 
Photo_Smith's Avatar
 
Photo_Smith is offline
Join Date: May 2012
Posts: 1,480
Yes, insert loosely misquoted 'all property is theft' quote here.
  Reply With Quote

Old 01-30-2014   #98
j j
Registered User
 
j j is offline
Join Date: Aug 2009
Posts: 792
Quote:
Originally Posted by Photo_Smith View Post
Yes, insert loosely misquoted 'all property is theft' quote here.
That's why Karl Marx always drank herbal tea.
  Reply With Quote

Old 01-30-2014   #99
Brian Atherton
Registered User
 
Brian Atherton's Avatar
 
Brian Atherton is offline
Join Date: Oct 2012
Location: Based in Blighty
Posts: 525
Quote:
Originally Posted by j j View Post
That's why Karl Marx always drank herbal tea.
Mmm... interesting character, Karl Marx...

Spent much of his life, living for the most, part off misappropriated money from his friend, the businessman, Freidrich Engels, who consistently stole from the family sewing thread firm, Ermen & Engels. While Karl & Friedrich collaboratively pursued the ruin of capitalism and attacked the bourgeoisie, they lived comfortable and rich, with for instance, Marx’s children attending private schools, while he mixed with the gentry and society’s elite, using his wife’s aristocratic connections at every opportunity.

Meanwhile Engels, as one would might expect as a man of considerable means, maintained a stable of thoroughbred horses, kept a mistress, rode with the hunt and enjoyed the stylish delights of the Albert Club, in Manchester.

Also, Marx somehow persuaded Engels to write newspaper articles for him, in particular for the New York Daily Herald, which Marx published under his own name, pocketing payment.

Rather an odd pair to be flag-bearers of communism, don’t you think?
__________________
Brian

"Maintenant, mon ami !"
http://www.asingulareye.wordpress.com
  Reply With Quote

Old 01-30-2014   #100
Ronald M
Registered User
 
Ronald M is offline
Join Date: Aug 2005
Posts: 4,486
Quote:
Originally Posted by Photo_Smith View Post
It is wrong, but if I leave my car door unlocked and leave my sunnies on the dashboard is it Ok to just take them?
It was easy to take them and times are bad–do these thing make it OK?

It may be a generational thing, i buy CD's LPs and downloads if I want music. A young colleague has never bought a CD but has a 1TB drive with 'all the music I could ever want' doesn't see it as wrong because everyone does it and I probably don't like the stuff enough to buy it, so if he didn't download it he'd just listen on Youtube.

What I think is worse than downloading images is claiming them as yours, that's not just infringing/stealing but also deceit, and could fool a potential client into thinking you could have taken it.

Life is changing. people now no longer value music as an object (CD, LP) they think of pictures in the same way.

On the internet the perception is it's all free, as much as you can eat.
No it is not ok, but if you left a stack of bills on the sidewalk, would you not expect someone to pick it up.
  Reply With Quote

Old 01-30-2014   #101
Photo_Smith
Registered User
 
Photo_Smith's Avatar
 
Photo_Smith is offline
Join Date: May 2012
Posts: 1,480
Quote:
Originally Posted by Ronald M View Post
No it is not ok, but if you left a stack of bills on the sidewalk, would you not expect someone to pick it up.
There would be an obvious difference- at lest I think so. If I lose something and it hasn't a mark on it to prove ownership then I'd be out of luck.

i think there's a huge difference between downloading images/music that you know belong to someone else and finding a dollar on the sidewalk.
If that dollar is in a wallet then I'd hand it in, but where the owner is untraceable the area is much less clear.
  Reply With Quote

Old 01-30-2014   #102
j j
Registered User
 
j j is offline
Join Date: Aug 2009
Posts: 792
Quote:
Originally Posted by Brian Atherton View Post
Mmm... interesting character, Karl Marx...
Interesting characters indeed. BTW I was just being flippant and enjoying a favourite pun.
  Reply With Quote

Old 01-30-2014   #103
Roger Hicks
Registered User
 
Roger Hicks is offline
Join Date: Apr 2005
Location: Aquitaine
Posts: 23,947
Quote:
Originally Posted by sig View Post
I believe that lying and making copyright infringement "more bad" than it is by calling it stealing does not help (assuming the goal is trying to change peoples behavior)
Why should people listen to a message that is a lie?

When people are told they are doing something wrong, they will be skeptical about the messenger and the message. And everything the messenger/message is doing wrong (like lying) will make the message easy to ignore.
Lie, eh?

Well, well, well.

You may disagree with equating copyright infringement and theft, but so far, your only argument has been that definitions never change. Which is -- guess what? -- a demonstrable lie.

Cheers,

R.
  Reply With Quote

Old 01-30-2014   #104
Brian Atherton
Registered User
 
Brian Atherton's Avatar
 
Brian Atherton is offline
Join Date: Oct 2012
Location: Based in Blighty
Posts: 525
Quote:
Originally Posted by Sejanus.Aelianus View Post
Well, the rest of the Marx brothers weren't much better, were they?
Boom, boom.

BTW I should have wrote, New York Daily Tribune.
__________________
Brian

"Maintenant, mon ami !"
http://www.asingulareye.wordpress.com
  Reply With Quote

Old 01-30-2014   #105
Roger Hicks
Registered User
 
Roger Hicks is offline
Join Date: Apr 2005
Location: Aquitaine
Posts: 23,947
Quote:
Originally Posted by Brian Atherton View Post
Mmm... interesting character, Karl Marx...

Spent much of his life, living for the most, part off misappropriated money from his friend, the businessman, Freidrich Engels, who consistently stole from the family sewing thread firm, Ermen & Engels. While Karl & Friedrich collaboratively pursued the ruin of capitalism and attacked the bourgeoisie, they lived comfortable and rich, with for instance, Marx’s children attending private schools, while he mixed with the gentry and society’s elite, using his wife’s aristocratic connections at every opportunity.

Meanwhile Engels, as one would might expect as a man of considerable means, maintained a stable of thoroughbred horses, kept a mistress, rode with the hunt and enjoyed the stylish delights of the Albert Club, in Manchester.

Also, Marx somehow persuaded Engels to write newspaper articles for him, in particular for the New York Daily Herald, which Marx published under his own name, pocketing payment.

Rather an odd pair to be flag-bearers of communism, don’t you think?
Years ago, just before the collapse of communism in Eastern Europe, a friend and I were working on a pure Marxist critique of Marx. Our opening chapter was called "Two Gentlemen Adventurers" (adventurism being a cardinal sin in Marxism). We also had some fun with their millennialist version of dialectical materialism and with the famous early footnote about all societies, prior to recorded history, being communistic (how could we know this if no-one wrote it down?)

But the wall fell down before we had written more than a few thousand words and somehow it hardly seemed worth pursuing. My chum had joined the Party in 1936; left in the 1950s; and then re-joined for the pleasure of being thrown out.

Cheers,

R.
  Reply With Quote

Old 01-30-2014   #106
sig
Registered User
 
sig is offline
Join Date: Nov 2009
Posts: 552
Quote:
Originally Posted by Roger Hicks View Post
Lie, eh?

Well, well, well.

You may disagree with equating copyright infringement and theft, but so far, your only argument has been that definitions never change. Which is -- guess what? -- a demonstrable lie.

Cheers,

R.
Sure. You are correct. Does not change the fact that copyright infringements is not the same as stealing.

I am naive, justice is against me and argue that definitions never change. At least I learn something new about myself.

Thanks Roger!

Cheers,

S
  Reply With Quote

Old 01-30-2014   #107
Brian Atherton
Registered User
 
Brian Atherton's Avatar
 
Brian Atherton is offline
Join Date: Oct 2012
Location: Based in Blighty
Posts: 525
As is often said, "there's nowt so queer as folk".

I've enjoyed (for the most part) this thread and its twists and turns, especially for your contributions, Roger.

I find it's been a little like watching University Challenge: I just can't respond fast enough before someones steals my thunder.
__________________
Brian

"Maintenant, mon ami !"
http://www.asingulareye.wordpress.com
  Reply With Quote

Old 01-30-2014   #108
noisycheese
Normal(ish) Human
 
noisycheese is offline
Join Date: Mar 2013
Posts: 1,279
Quote:
Originally Posted by sig View Post
...When people are told they are doing something wrong, they will be skeptical about the messenger and the message. And everything the messenger/message is doing wrong (like lying) will make the message easy to ignore.
Based on what I have read, the majority of bank robbers believe that what they did to land them in prison was not wrong: The robber needed money; the bank had money, and lots of it; it is insured by the FDIC; so he took a few thousand from a bank that has a vault full of cash - so what?? The FDIC will replace it and nobody gets hurt.

The bank robber needed money; the end justifies the means. Therefore, armed robbery is not wrong in the robber's mind.
Such thinking is the work of a psychopathic mind. The copyright infringer/image thief's mind goes through the same process of the end justifies the means thinking.
Bank robbers are "big" psychopaths; the copyright infringer/image thief is a "little" psychopath. Both use the same convoluted and dysfunctional logic to justify their methods.

I understand that this type of thinking is to most people these days a laughable and quaint relic from a bygone era when issues of right and wrong, integrity and honor actually mattered to the majority of people. Even in 2014, such issues still matter to some of us.
__________________
The Leica M passion: From the inside it's hard to explain; from the outside it's hard to understand.
  Reply With Quote

Old 01-30-2014   #109
Jamie123
Registered User
 
Jamie123 is offline
Join Date: Nov 2005
Posts: 2,783
Quote:
Originally Posted by noisycheese View Post
I understand that this type of thinking is to most people these days a laughable and quaint relic from a bygone era when issues of right and wrong, integrity and honor actually mattered to the majority of people. Even in 2014, such issues still matter to some of us.
Oh yeah, that bygone era when women knew to shut up when a man was talking and people of color accepted their place in society as second class citizens. Those good ol' times.
But hey, I guess people just had more honor and integrity back then...
  Reply With Quote

Old 01-31-2014   #110
Brian Atherton
Registered User
 
Brian Atherton's Avatar
 
Brian Atherton is offline
Join Date: Oct 2012
Location: Based in Blighty
Posts: 525
Quote:
Originally Posted by Sejanus.Aelianus View Post
I'm never entirely sure when this golden age was. ...
Me, neither.

Whenever the someone in conversation waxes lyrical about the mythical 'good old days', I just reply 'dentristy'.
__________________
Brian

"Maintenant, mon ami !"
http://www.asingulareye.wordpress.com
  Reply With Quote

Old 01-31-2014   #111
Roger Hicks
Registered User
 
Roger Hicks is offline
Join Date: Apr 2005
Location: Aquitaine
Posts: 23,947
Quote:
Originally Posted by Brian Atherton View Post
Me, neither.

Whenever the someone in conversation waxes lyrical about the mythical 'good old days', I just reply 'dentistry'.
Dear Brian,

Me too.

Cheers,

R.
  Reply With Quote

Old 01-31-2014   #112
fireblade
Vincenzo.
 
fireblade's Avatar
 
fireblade is offline
Join Date: Sep 2009
Location: Australia
Posts: 1,139
  Reply With Quote

One Last Quote
Old 02-02-2014   #113
Dektol Dan
Registered User
 
Dektol Dan is offline
Join Date: Jun 2007
Posts: 922
One Last Quote

Much of this is 'much ado about nothing', that is, as technology progresses, and becomes more easily accessible to the masses, a work's value may decrease. As far as photography and music is concerned, at one time a dark room and recording studio were requirements for professional creation, now with everyone being a photographer and a musician (at least a rapper), a cell phone and an app will suffice for creation of both.

So what is the value of a copyright?

Woody Guthrie (whose family still lives well from his copyrights), had a great trouble with infringement (he being the infringing party). When he began writing, borrowing from here and there was not a big thing until copyright became an issue as commercial distribution developed.

Here's his take on infringement:

'This song is copy written; anyone singin' it will be a good friend of mine.'
  Reply With Quote
Reply


Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

vB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off



All times are GMT -8. The time now is 01:11.


vBulletin skin developed by: eXtremepixels
Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.6.8
Copyright ©2000 - 2019, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.

All content on this site is Copyright Protected and owned by its respective owner. You may link to content on this site but you may not reproduce any of it in whole or part without written consent from its owner.