If this is your first visit, be sure to check out the FAQ by clicking the link above. You may have to register before you can post: click the register link above to proceed. To start viewing messages, select the forum that you want to visit from the selection below. |
|
|
Thread Tools | Display Modes |
#41
|
|||
|
|||
Rear Window 500/8 Mirror
In article , David B.
wrote: once again, you're trying to weasel out of having stolen other people's content. I've stolen nothing. actually, you did. you stole his intellectual property and used it without his permission. I stole NOTHING. I posted a link, nothing more. except that the link was not yours to repost. it was *someone* *else's* *photo* and which you used *without* *their* *permission*. This link works .... now:- https://www.cat-lovers-only.com/imag...8chR33SzqK.jpg It did NOT work this morning. yes it did, and worked yesterday, the day before, all the way back to whenever it was originally posted. you ****ed up again and refuse to acknowledge it. |
#42
|
|||
|
|||
Rear Window 500/8 Mirror
On 23-May-18 6:35 PM, nospam wrote:
In article , David B. wrote: once again, you're trying to weasel out of having stolen other people's content. I've stolen nothing. actually, you did. you stole his intellectual property and used it without his permission. I stole NOTHING. I posted a link, nothing more. except that the link was not yours to repost. Links on Usenet are free for anyone to use as they see fit. it was *someone* *else's* *photo* and which you used *without* *their* *permission*. I posted a link - Savageduck had/has full control of what is given away there. This link works .... now:- https://www.cat-lovers-only.com/imag...8chR33SzqK.jpg It did NOT work this morning. yes it did, and worked yesterday, the day before, all the way back to whenever it was originally posted. you ****ed up again and refuse to acknowledge it. More lies! :-( -- David B. |
#43
|
|||
|
|||
Rear Window 500/8 Mirror
In article , David B.
wrote: once again, you're trying to weasel out of having stolen other people's content. I've stolen nothing. actually, you did. you stole his intellectual property and used it without his permission. I stole NOTHING. I posted a link, nothing more. except that the link was not yours to repost. Links on Usenet are free for anyone to use as they see fit. absolutely false. |
#44
|
|||
|
|||
Rear Window 500/8 Mirror
On 5/23/2018 8:38 AM, -hh wrote:
On Wednesday, May 23, 2018 at 6:53:58 AM UTC-4, android wrote: On 2018-05-23 10:21:56 +0000, Whisky-dave said: [attributions] Technically it is stealing. Which it is seen as. [...] No it's not. Downloading third party material and then uploading it is stealing. With hotlinking the picture remains on your chosen server and thus under your control and not stolen. Feel free to change those laws... Again: https://photocopyrightlaw.com/can-embedding-hotlinking-or-inline-linking-constitute-copyright-infringement/ https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Inline...s_that_inline_ An interesting legal perspective, although I'd make a counterpoint that it really should depend on just how the hotlinking was done. IMO, its one thing if the hotlinked image had been dutifully attributed to its copyright owner, but if it was misrepresented as belonging to the one who did the hotlink, that's entirely a different story. When I've happened to have found hotlinks that fall more into the category of the latter, a strategy that I've taken at times is to change the image out from underneath them, so that they're linked to something different than they intended. Here's an example: http://huntzinger.com/photo/2002/germany/euros.jpg FWIW, some people have reportedly chosen alternative images which are vastly less ... civilized. When I post an image in DB, I usually do a low res image, or put a copyright notice on it. If anyone asked what technique I used to make the image, I will share that info, to the extent I remember what I did, as well as tell them where the image was taken. I have also given some people high res images so they can make print for their personal use. I have even gone so far as to change the ICC profile, if needed, and adjust the print for expected lighting conditions, at no cost. What I do not want, and will not tolerate is using my work without my permission, or making derivations from my work, without my permission. IOW I will **** away thousands of dollars, but react badly if you try to steal a penny from me. -- PeterN |
#45
|
|||
|
|||
Rear Window 500/8 Mirror
On 5/23/2018 10:57 AM, nospam wrote:
In article , Whisky-dave wrote: If you upload an image (that you don't own) to a site and you don't distrubute it or let anyone else see it you can count it as a backup even if it isn't your own. wrong. Almost agree. If it is my site, and I simply want to enjoy the image as is, I think its within fair use. If it's to another site, you are probably correct. Interpretations of "fair use" differ in different jurisdictions. I won't even pretend to guess what is or isn't fair use in GB. -- PeterN |
#46
|
|||
|
|||
Rear Window 500/8 Mirror
On 5/23/2018 1:14 PM, nospam wrote:
In article , David B. wrote: On 22-May-18 11:12 PM, Savageduck wrote: Regardless of my CC by-nc-sa license, I would expect the courtesy to advise me of your intention to post that DB link on Facebook which I personally never use. I don't understand your license reference. CC = Creative Commons Thank you. I'm fairly sure that you've told me previously that I could share you images if I wished. somehow i doubt that. once again, you're trying to weasel out of having stolen other people's content. I've stolen nothing. actually, you did. you stole his intellectual property and used it without his permission. Savageduck still has his fantastic image of the Cheetah. I'm now wishing that I *had* downloaded and kept a copy. My loss, that's for sure. :-( digging yourself an even deeper hole. You just have to choose an appropriate cat. https://www.cat-lovers-only.com/imag...on-litter-box- 375.jpg.pagespeed.ic.8chR33SzqK.jpg I get "Sorry, there's no such page here" that's because you're an idiot. No, I'm not. true. you're dumber than an idiot. you being an idiot would be an improvement. FYI "Idiots.—Those so defective that the mental development never exceeds that or a normal child of about two years. Imbeciles.—Those whose development is higher than that of an idiot, but whose intelligence does not exceed that of a normal child of about seven years. Morons.—Those whose mental development is above that of an imbecile, but does not exceed that of a normal child of about twelve years." — Edmund Burke Huey, Backward and Feeble-Minded Children, 1912 -- PeterN |
#47
|
|||
|
|||
Rear Window 500/8 Mirror
On May 23, 2018, PeterN wrote
(in article ): On 5/23/2018 8:38 AM, -hh wrote: On Wednesday, May 23, 2018 at 6:53:58 AM UTC-4, android wrote: On 2018-05-23 10:21:56 +0000, Whisky-dave said: [attributions] Technically it is stealing. Which it is seen as. [...] No it's not. Downloading third party material and then uploading it is stealing. With hotlinking the picture remains on your chosen server and thus under your control and not stolen. Feel free to change those laws... Again: https://photocopyrightlaw.com/can-em...line-linking-c onstitute-copyright-infringement/ https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Inline...ssues_that_inl ine_ An interesting legal perspective, although I'd make a counterpoint that it really should depend on just how the hotlinking was done. IMO, its one thing if the hotlinked image had been dutifully attributed to its copyright owner, but if it was misrepresented as belonging to the one who did the hotlink, that's entirely a different story. When I've happened to have found hotlinks that fall more into the category of the latter, a strategy that I've taken at times is to change the image out from underneath them, so that they're linked to something different than they intended. Here's an example: http://huntzinger.com/photo/2002/germany/euros.jpg FWIW, some people have reportedly chosen alternative images which are vastly less ... civilized. When I post an image in DB, I usually do a low res image, or put a copyright notice on it. If anyone asked what technique I used to make the image, I will share that info, to the extent I remember what I did, as well as tell them where the image was taken. I have also given some people high res images so they can make print for their personal use. I have even gone so far as to change the ICC profile, if needed, and adjust the print for expected lighting conditions, at no cost. What I do not want, and will not tolerate is using my work without my permission, or making derivations from my work, without my permission. IOW I will **** away thousands of dollars, but react badly if you try to steal a penny from me. ;-) -- Regards, Savageduck |
#48
|
|||
|
|||
Rear Window 500/8 Mirror
On 23-May-18 7:54 PM, PeterN wrote:
On 5/23/2018 1:14 PM, nospam wrote: In article , David B. wrote: On 22-May-18 11:12 PM, Savageduck wrote: Regardless of my CC by-nc-sa license, I would expect the courtesy to advise me of your intention to post that DB link on Facebook which I personally never use. I don't understand your license reference. CC = Creative Commons Thank you. I'm fairly sure that you've told me previously that I could share you images if I wished. somehow i doubt that. once again, you're trying to weasel out of having stolen other people's content. I've stolen nothing. actually, you did. you stole his intellectual property and used it without his permission. Savageduck still has his fantastic image of the Cheetah. I'm now wishing that I *had* downloaded and kept a copy. My loss, that's for sure. :-( digging yourself an even deeper hole. You just have to choose an appropriate cat. https://www.cat-lovers-only.com/imag...on-litter-box- 375.jpg.pagespeed.ic.8chR33SzqK.jpg I get "Sorry, there's no such page here" that's because you're an idiot. No, I'm not. true. you're dumber than an idiot. you being an idiot would be an improvement. FYI "Idiots.—Those so defective that the mental development never exceeds that or a normal child of about two years. Imbeciles.—Those whose development is higher than that of an idiot, but whose intelligence does not exceed that of a normal child of about seven years. Morons.—Those whose mental development is above that of an imbecile, but does not exceed that of a normal child of about twelve years." — Edmund Burke Huey, Backward and Feeble-Minded Children, 1912 Thank you for providing the evidence of nospam's lies! :-) -- David B. |
#49
|
|||
|
|||
Rear Window 500/8 Mirror
In article , PeterN
wrote: https://www.cat-lovers-only.com/imag...on-litter-box- 375.jpg.pagespeed.ic.8chR33SzqK.jpg I get "Sorry, there's no such page here" that's because you're an idiot. No, I'm not. true. you're dumber than an idiot. you being an idiot would be an improvement. FYI "Idiots.‹Those so defective that the mental development never exceeds that or a normal child of about two years. Imbeciles.‹Those whose development is higher than that of an idiot, but whose intelligence does not exceed that of a normal child of about seven years. Morons.‹Those whose mental development is above that of an imbecile, but does not exceed that of a normal child of about twelve years." ‹ Edmund Burke Huey, Backward and Feeble-Minded Children, 1912 yep. a better comparison would be to bacteria. |
#50
|
|||
|
|||
Rear Window 500/8 Mirror
On 2018-05-24 09:16:59 +0000, Whisky-dave said:
On Wednesday, 23 May 2018 17:01:34 UTC+1, android wrote: On 2018-05-23 12:51:19 +0000, Whisky-dave said: Uploading isn't stealing . In extenso then It sure is. what is extenso ? In extenso... https://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/in%20extenso Unless you have secured the rights to the material. Not true Believe me, it is... You're publicising something Uploading to a server is NOT publicising. It sure is if you're making it available to the public... Otherwise everyone that backed up to a cloud service would be charged with theft. Depending what it sthat they are backing up... that you don't own for your own purposes. Quotations are different You are allowed to backup what ever is on you computer or tablet. As long as you have the right to have it on it... -- teleportation kills |
Thread Tools | |
Display Modes | |
|
|
Similar Threads | ||||
Thread | Thread Starter | Forum | Replies | Last Post |
Rear cover foam in an old SLR | Chris Loffredo | 35mm Photo Equipment | 1 | February 17th 06 07:58 PM |
Rear cover foam in an old SLR | Mike | 35mm Photo Equipment | 0 | February 17th 06 03:47 PM |
Rear tilt focus? | [email protected] | Large Format Photography Equipment | 28 | April 20th 05 12:41 AM |
WTB: 2d rear extension & other discussion | Collin Brendemuehl | Large Format Equipment For Sale | 2 | September 30th 04 06:02 PM |
will frequent use of mirror lockup shorten lifespan of mirror mechanism? | Mxsmanic | 35mm Photo Equipment | 9 | August 16th 04 06:13 PM |