"pretty girls" thread attachments and copyrights
 

OK, i'm gonna be an *********:

a quick review of the "pretty girls" thread raises a question.

i notice more than a few post that have pics attached that "appear" on casual observation to be copyrighted.

more than a few of these post (with said attachments) were made by members that have been active in the "downloading" threads, and have taken the position that using someone else's work without permission is wrong.

stuffmagazine.com and tiffanylang.com are just 2 examples, and both sites have explicit notices regarding their copyrights.

i am curious if the use of those images were used with the copyright holder's permission or adhered to the owners T&C.

my question is simply if the images that "appear" to be copyrighted that were posted by members that have voiced their opinion that downloading is stealing, in fact received the owner's permission use their intellectual property before reproducing it.

"LET'S GET READY TO RUMBLE!!!"

"can you smell what the rock is cooking?" hint- it stinks :mad:


DISCLAIMER- the two phrases above are most likely trademarked, and if so, are the intellectual property of their respective owners!

Well, it all depends on how much each has contributed, and the way in which they use the contribution. Copywrite is a good thing, but in the world of learning something new every day, having the Fair Use Act helps get around that in some circumstances. Hence, here are some portions taken (under the FUA) to help and educate on the matter:) "The Fair Use Act is based upon the premise that so long as you use a portion of a work incorporated into another work for educational use, it is permissible to use without obtaining the explicate permission of the author/owner" also "Section 107 of the Copyright Act of 1976.
Limitations on exclusive rights, for purposes such as:
criticism
comment
news reporting
teaching -including multiple copies for classroom
scholarship
research" and finally "Copyright: obtain permission or don’t use.
Fair Use:
may use a portion of the work
favored when transformed and from nonfiction
non-profit use and no effect on authors earnings". So in conclusion, we may legally (I think) educate ourselves in the manner that we have been doing, so far!?!

nowturbo, thanks for your comments on fair use.

unfortunately, none of the materials you quoted are actually from section 107 code, who's test is that of commerical vs. non-proffit educational use.

PS- i have enjoyed the PG thread as much as the next member.

I never downloaded or posted any 'pictures' of any kind. They were all just harmless "0's" and "1's" in a file format! If me or anyone else assembled them into anything that would constitute copywrite infringement, then that was just an error. I know I speak for the entire forum, if not the whole world in saying "We're SORRY" and we'll erase those images for our minds! (but we might just keep the files !!):D ;) :p

for clarification: i have absolutely NO PROBLEM with the PG thread, and have throughly enjoyed it.

my only question is if the attachment of images that appear to be copyrighted that were posted by members that had voiced strong opinions regarding others intellectual property rights on the various "downloading" threads were reproduced here in a manner that was consistent with the views they had previously expressed.

I know I'm among the people you are addressing with this, if not THE person you're addressing...and so I answer:

Every picture I have posted on that thread has either been copied from the website of the OWNER of the photograph, where they made it available THEMSELVES for free downloading, or it was my own photograph. It's very easy to set up a block on jpg downloading on one's site if so desired. Many sites do. I have also PAID for access to various photos that I wanted, but were not made available for free by the owners.

Any more questions?

Mike

mike,

dennis stuff inc. (stuff magazine) has very clear notices about the use of their property in their T&C that prohibits the use of their intellectual property "on any other website".

a copyright owner is not required to block copy access to their work, and still owns the rights regarding its reproduction.

mike, i know you think im an *******, and thats OK, but...

i hope that you can understand my view, as i strive to understand yours.

i know that "downloading" is dear to your heart; and i assume primarily because it is near to your wallet, and i empathise (sp?)

olive branch: we both are in atlanta. i extend an offer to buy you a beer (or beverage of your choice) and further discuss any issue you like.

cheers, and keep on rocking. - ben

Someone on this board (who will remain nameless at this point) still owes ME a beer!!! Maybe we could all meet up

Pictures are copyrighted. What does that mean? That means they cannot be sold or appear in publications that will generate profit. (or non profit).

But showing them here, is merely sharing. Then again, you can say "well I share my MP3's"

What to do to remedy this? If the pics comes from a website, just hot link it, that way you're not distributing the file, you're just linking to the site. And that's ok.

sorry mike, i didnt think you opposed a little "ribbing" ;)

looks like maybe dennis stuff inc is the one getting "ribbed" :(

Hahaha...No, not an *********, just occasionally misled. But we all can be, so...


Sounds great to me!...and yes, Cap'n, I own you a beer...Problem is, I'm not sure when I'm going to BE in Atlanta again! :) The band is booked up thru the end of this month, then we are going to Australia for the first half of August...So perhaps after that?...We'll get around to it sometime soon. :D

Mike

:p Never. :D

Hey, the Stuff logo is huge right there on the pictures...Seems to me that they are offering them up as copy-and-paste self-promotion! A great idea...Feel free to copy-and-paste any picture of me or my band that has the band name on it! ;)

Mike