Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Protecting My Copyright

baldheretic.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

71–80 of 89 posts

Re: Protecting My Copyright

#71

Post by wpietri »

jorgeleo wrote: post #64
bigiain wrote: post #56

Earlier quoted context omitted.

"I wonder... Does the original website from which the photo was taken had: 1. A statement that the photo was not public domain? 2. A way to contact the author with the clear purpose of license it?" It doesn't work that way. Just like you don't need to put a sign on your door saying "The belongings in this house belong to me. If you want to buy them call me on 5555-1234". The _default_ is that if you dont own a photog…

In theory there is no difference betweem theory and practice, but in practice there is. I agree that in default should works the way you say, but that is theory, in practice it is not what actually happens a the OP found out. And we need to acknowledge the reality that people does not behave as theory, law, or whatever other abstract term expects (the law is so abstract that it needs a punishment machinery to be resp…

It may be hard to reach you way up on your high horse there, but I don't think a "these photos are mine, all mine" disclaimer would have done a ton for him.

Take Candice as an example. She's crazier than a bucket of ferrets on meth. Even normal users don't read much of the text on websites; look at any of Jakob Nielsen's eye-tracking studies. People who are task-focused (e.g., find an image for their site they're rushing to get up) read even less. Given that, how much do you think Candice will read?

And once it's on another site, people will start stealing it from there too. Coughpinterestcough.

So as someone who also tries to look at how things work, I don't think he did anything wrong here. Suddenly everybody's a publisher, and it's going to take a while to teach them about copyright. This is part of the education process.

Re: Protecting My Copyright

#72

Post by gee_totes »

ZeroGravitas wrote: post #42

I've just been reading "Against Intellectual Monopoly" and it's interesting how things change when you mentally substitute "protecting my copyright" with "exercising my monopoly". It completely changes the dynamic of who is acting and who is reacting.

While those terms are interchangeable, I don't think they are equivalent. The OP doesn't have a monopoly over the Houston skyline, and anyone is welcome to set up a camera in the same spot and take an identical photo and use it for their website.

Is this the link to the book mentioned? http://www.dklevine.com/general/intellectual/against.htm

Re: Protecting My Copyright

#73

Post by jorgeleo »

wpietri wrote: post #71
jorgeleo wrote: post #64

Earlier quoted context omitted.

In theory there is no difference betweem theory and practice, but in practice there is. I agree that in default should works the way you say, but that is theory, in practice it is not what actually happens a the OP found out. And we need to acknowledge the reality that people does not behave as theory, law, or whatever other abstract term expects (the law is so abstract that it needs a punishment machinery to be resp…

It may be hard to reach you way up on your high horse there, but I don't think a "these photos are mine, all mine" disclaimer would have done a ton for him. Take Candice as an example. She's crazier than a bucket of ferrets on meth. Even normal users don't read much of the text on websites; look at any of Jakob Nielsen's eye-tracking studies. People who are task-focused (e.g., find an image for their site they're rus…

Is not a matter of high or low horses, but a matter of choices.

"She's crazier than a bucket of ferrets on meth"... love it.

"how much do you think Candice will read?" A bucket of ferrets on meth... none. But that was not the only place the he found the photo.

"and it's going to take a while to teach them about copyright. This is part of the education process."... teaching, that is something that I can agree with. On the other side, in principle I cannot agree with Goya's picture "La letra con sangre entra" (Teaching by punishment, or spare the rod and spoil the child) http://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:La_letra_con_sangre_e...

If I am in a high horse, then then that kind of "teaching" is egocentric and self entitlement.

Re: Protecting My Copyright

#74

Post by eli »

icebraining wrote: post #38
rmc wrote: post #37

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Yes, that's the DMCA, isn't it?

No, the DMCA only forces them to take down the infringing content, i.e., the image.

DMCA doesn't force them to do anything, it just says that if you play by these rules then you, as the host, can't also be held liable for damages.

Re: Protecting My Copyright

#75

Post by chc »

slowpoke wrote: post #65
etfb wrote: post #46

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I can understand where you're coming from, but I think you lack empathy and experience. If you like, send me a copy of every piece of creative work you've ever produced -- songs, poems, articles, computer programs, graphics, whatever -- and I'll just go ahead and post it wherever I want without giving you any attribution. If you can tell me you're OK with that, I'll modify my opinion: rather than saying you lack empa…

>I'll just go ahead and post it wherever I want without giving you any attribution Actually, I use the WTFPL[1] for a lot of code I produce, so yes, you could do that, though it wouldn't be nice to do that. My opinion is that copyright should not exist. While I can't demand copies from anyone, I don't think anyone has a right to stop me from sharing anything that I have access to, either. Putting things on the intern…

Do you earn your living off this WTFPL software?

Re: Protecting My Copyright

#76

Post by chc »

DanBC wrote: post #67
notspanishflu wrote: post #40

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Maybe I'm misreading it but I can't find her claiming she's a lawyer. I've found the bit claiming she's the President of an organization called 'Attorneys for Special Needs Children' and in her G+ page she says 'I studied in South Texas College of Law' but she isn't claiming she's finished the studies or that she has got any title, certification, or the bar card.

Weakly here: > a partially disabled atty and weakly here: > You cost me thousands in billable time But then directly here: ( http://chicksandpolitics.com/nauseatingsagagarciaboohoo/ ) > Attorney & CEO of Schwager Consulting & Marketing; Also here: ( http://www.whenigrowupi.com/ ) > though I still practice law via the Schwager Law Firm. My law practice thrives Claims several times to be the grand-daughter of Henrik Ib…

> For anyone who isn't aware, the church of Jesus Christ and Latter Day Saints (or whatever they're called) have extensive genealogical databases. They're friendly and welcoming to people who'd like to research family trees. At least, when my pa did that in London they made no attempt to convert me and provided him with help using their systems and computers.

Yeah, they really are interested in genealogy for its own sake, not as a recruiting tool. They just want people to do their genealogy and contribute it to the database so it can be used by others. They don't want to scare people away from doing that by using it as a sales tactic. It's part of their general ideology that stresses the importance of family.

Re: Protecting My Copyright

#77

Post by ZeroGravitas »

gee_totes wrote: post #72
ZeroGravitas wrote: post #42

I've just been reading "Against Intellectual Monopoly" and it's interesting how things change when you mentally substitute "protecting my copyright" with "exercising my monopoly". It completely changes the dynamic of who is acting and who is reacting.

While those terms are interchangeable, I don't think they are equivalent. The OP doesn't have a monopoly over the Houston skyline, and anyone is welcome to set up a camera in the same spot and take an identical photo and use it for their website. Is this the link to the book mentioned? http://www.dklevine.com/general/intellectual/against.htm

He's not got a monopoly on all pictures like that but he has a monopoly right on that particular image he took, lasting for 70 years beyond the date of his death, or else he wouldn't be able to send out DMCA takedowns for it and otherwise control the manner in which it is duplicated and used.

(I just googled to check the length and found this heartbreaking message on one of those cheesy Q&A sites: My grandmother has a senior picture of my mom from 1969 and I wanted a copy of it. Is the copyright for that picture up? If not is there a way for me to get a copy of it?)

And that is the book, though note it's a slightly out of date version. The final version is here:

http://www.dklevine.com/general/intellectual/againstfinal.ht...

It's not a great work by any means, but it's a good overview of the craziness of copyrights and patents when viewed from the perpective of economics.

Re: Protecting My Copyright

#78

Post by cma »

gee_totes wrote: post #72
ZeroGravitas wrote: post #42

I've just been reading "Against Intellectual Monopoly" and it's interesting how things change when you mentally substitute "protecting my copyright" with "exercising my monopoly". It completely changes the dynamic of who is acting and who is reacting.

While those terms are interchangeable, I don't think they are equivalent. The OP doesn't have a monopoly over the Houston skyline, and anyone is welcome to set up a camera in the same spot and take an identical photo and use it for their website. Is this the link to the book mentioned? http://www.dklevine.com/general/intellectual/against.htm

Not true everywhere:

http://www.dpreview.com/news/2012/01/25/Imitated_Image_Copyr...

Re: Protecting My Copyright

#79

Post by Natsu »

pdonis wrote: post #62
Natsu wrote: post #52

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Actually, there have been fair use decisions when an entire work was used non-commercially: http://www.wired.com/threatlevel/2011/06/fair-use-defense/ I'm not saying that's the case here, but whether the use was commercial or not is one of the four factors considered when deciding fair use.

I don't think "commercial" requires you to "make money" from the use. I think using the photo as an illustration on your business website qualifies as "commercial" even if you can't show that it brought you any business. (Of course, IANAL.)

There are different degrees "commercial." It's not a binary distinction.

Re: Protecting My Copyright

#80

Post by bigiain »

jorgeleo wrote: post #64
bigiain wrote: post #56

Earlier quoted context omitted.

"I wonder... Does the original website from which the photo was taken had: 1. A statement that the photo was not public domain? 2. A way to contact the author with the clear purpose of license it?" It doesn't work that way. Just like you don't need to put a sign on your door saying "The belongings in this house belong to me. If you want to buy them call me on 5555-1234". The _default_ is that if you dont own a photog…

In theory there is no difference betweem theory and practice, but in practice there is. I agree that in default should works the way you say, but that is theory, in practice it is not what actually happens a the OP found out. And we need to acknowledge the reality that people does not behave as theory, law, or whatever other abstract term expects (the law is so abstract that it needs a punishment machinery to be resp…

Interesting - I see the story as saying almost exactly the opposite.

Crazy lady behaved in a common-but-still-technically-wrong manner, thinking (if she thought at all) that she'd "get away with it", presumably "'cause everybody else does".

The thing is, she got caught, and none of her "but everybody _else_ does it!" defenses stand up to even the most minor scrutiny.

Note, this is a lot like speeding - (almost) everybody _does_ it, and we all try to justify ourselves with lines like "I was just keeping up with the traffic", or "the speed limit is set unreasonably low for the conditions", or "my vehicle/driving skills are significantly better than the lowest common denominator they used to calculate the safe limit" - but every now and then we get caught, and none of those justifications mean anything.

Copyright law and the DMCA might well be "wrong", but if you think so you need to lobby to get the law changed. Arbitrarily choosing the break copyright then complaining when you get caught is just like being that guy with the fast car who speeds _everywhere_ bitching about getting speeding tickets. To most (informed) people, you just became "the crazy person".

Post reply on HN