What I meant was: The 'c/e' was a reference to "Is capitalism from patriachy" or the reverse. Loosely, I mean if you're interested in talking anarchism, feminism, and the root causes of this debacle we call western culture, I'm interested. Let's start a thread. I think there would be agreement and there would be challenge. But not here. I'm operating from the understanding, or beliefPlease Register or Log in to view the hidden image! that it is bad form to go so far off topic. If this is not the case someone pls, let me know. See, someone warned me that I might be headed toward being "flamebait" and, as I know I can be less than skilled at grokking rules for social interactions, it's a case of CYA.
No. You left out something whitewolf said. He also said: "If you want to copyright something, you have to register it prior to publishing it (even on the internet)." This is just not true.
So where and how do you think a copyright comes from? ...just out of thin air? Or just because someone says, "Hey, that's mine!" Baron Max
Follow the links and read. Copyright is a right, just as the right of free speech. You dont have to register for that do you ?
The right of free speech is a law ...it's part of the Constitution and is upheld in numerous courts of law. Copyright laws are much, much different ...and each case requires a court and lawyers and judges to decide. Okay ....what if two people take exactly the same picture ...who has the copyright to that picture? And why? Baron Max
That I understand, and I agree, but surely that is a matter for the state to get involved in as it would be classed as a criminal offence, not a case for a civil law suit. A criminal case I'd understand, a money grabbing lawsuit I see little justification for. Oh please, to subjegate women? Nobody forces women to do those things. If they all said no then there'd be no prostitutes but they don't. Most of them give it away for free so why not let them sell it? You're right though any feminist rant is an entirely different topic as it's irrelevant to this issue. Womens rights? Don't give me that crap, it's got nothing to do with her sex anymore than her religion or how many feet she has and if they are webbed. How far do artistic rights stretch? People copy things all the time, original thought is widely considered dead, how much damage does it do? If nothing else she has gained from this with exposure and publicity, she's not exactly much of a victim. Whoever chose the pic should(and most likely will) be sacked, that's accountability and responsibility within the company. Then they should recall and remove the pic and apologise, issueing a statement that they made a mistake and did not have permission. That is fair enough, but has it damaged her reputation at all? Would you have picked that dvd up before and said "oh I know the person who took this pic?" could you even do that now without re-reading the article for her name? Now you're just speculating. As I said, you can't see her face, so therefore she doesn't even look young. Either knowingly illegal, ignorant, or maybe just unlucky(who said they knew who the author was?). Agreed. However that doesn't change that the lawsuit isn't about removing the image, it's about her 'compensation rights'. If it's criminal it's for the state to decide. If she wants the images removed then she can sue for that, but it doesn't make her entitled to 'damages' which is what the article reports she is after, not justice, but damages.
I wouldn't use a label to describe myself, they never fit quite right, I'm a lot of things mixed into one. There wasn't an argument, I wanted to know why he felt the need to imply gay porn would be offensive. I couldn't care less what most of America thinks, he directed it at me. The irony is most Americans(and all other people) will do things if they can get away with it or won't be recognised, which is exactly the point I made. How? Nobody even knew it was hers, she could have kept this perfectly quiet, but obviously the better option is the opposite end of the spectrum; a public apology, no need for damages at all really especially as is anything she has gained more wider acclaim and publicity from this. Maybe I already did? Point still stands. Is the wide publicity that it's hers not a cut enough? How many people actually watch that porn DVD(or better yet will admit it?), or actually notice the cover? Don't you think they'd be a tad preoccupied to notice?Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image! It also doesn't have her name anywhere on it, it's across the atlantic, there are so many reasons it just wouldn't be connected to her on a frequent level. I just can't stand her acting like it's about morality and what it's been used for rather than about the money. I don't like the companies, I'd love to see them taken down a peg or two, but not over something like this, it's most likely they'll offer her a settlement to use the picture and she'll take it cause it's the money she wants and she's got something out of this already.
Because I'm blunt and refuse to be so naive? Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image! I'll take your word for it. Who said it means it can be used freely? All that's been said is she's a moron for not protecting her content better. Sure she wants a portfolio, but it doesnt' have to be public, she should keep it for her close friends and potential employers and the like. I agree it's not legal, I dispute what damage it has caused her. That's exactly what she got, maybe now she'll be smarter, I'm sorry she had to learn the hard way but being naive is part of life.
This is a part of a quote from one of enmos' posts from earlier: I think this sums up what I'm getting at: What losses?
Am I the only one who laughed at that part? If for no other reason than the fact they chose the pic then blame her for it! I can almost feel sorry for her.
Man, I can't believe people are still this ignorant on copyright law. There is no need to register a copyright - as Enmos has already stated, any time you create an original work and fix it in any sort of media (written, recorded, photo, whatever) you have an instant, automatic copyright to it. There is no need to register a copyright, post a copyright notice, or anything else.
Unfortunately I side with The Pirate Bay on their current stance, that copyright law in the USA is nothing more than made-up fantasy designed to cause lawyers more trouble and give them greater stupidity! There is no such thing as a copyright, the only person who holds the rights to something is the one who made it, in this case there was nothing made, a photo isn't actually real! Sadly this girl looks cute for being 14 on the cover, if she were in it perhaps I'd purchase the thing off ebay :C~ Alas we find the female is stupid and relatively blind. Are you reading this? Well you'd better not be because fonts are copyrighted, as a matter of fact you can't even be reading what I've typed without my consent so I'm going to have to sue you for at least 1 dollar per word you've read so far Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image! Sorry... Oh yea I am going to post a picture of a faucet sink, then if you see it or even think of it I'm going to sue you for that too! What a fun world, weee make up things and sound professional, I have an idea I'm going to say I can copyright someones outfit, the thing they wear?! How about that!!! "Hi Debra you look dashing today." "Shut up Sam you pig I hate you." "Now now Debra I've copyrighted that outfit, if you're not nice I'll have it removed." "Go screw yourself you gerk, I thought you were crazy but..." Pulls Debras clothes off violently "What are you doing freak, I'm telling" "Now now Debra darling I have the copyright right here, you can't do anything you broke the copyright law to my heart." As we can see example 1 is akin to what copyright means in todays modern age. It's meaningless. With the advent of digital means to transfer data I predict further attempts to protect rights, be they intellectual or not will ultimately fail. Innovation will come but so shall the loss of what once was believed to be OWNED. Let me re-iterate again, you stupid fools and weakminded simpletons cannot OWN or COPYRIGHT any of these (in reality not the make believe world you live in): 1. Photos 2. Videos 3. Programs 4. Music 5. Anything Everything is open to usury, there is no limit. The Pirate Bay and others like them will make you realize this soon enough. We must fight against the USA and it's sickly obsessed culture of rights to things which have none! PS This has been a rambling by yours truly
Thanks Nasor, im slowly starting to loose my cool here.. Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image! Shut up DarksidZz Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image!
Maybe, maybe not. Since this was a porn company ripping off a 14 year-old girl's photo for blatantly commercial purposes, the judge might award large punitive damages.
