Dave,
So we can have this discussion in only a manner which is determined by
yourself?
Children count, pictures of dogs count, pictures of someone's gran or
bank statement or a tree counts. If your arguments hold tight then they
hold tight for all examples. Hard to have a discussion when people
threaten to take their ball away and not play anymore.
Which signifies no more than the end of this discussion with you
perhaps, but thought it worth mentioning in case the negative reactions
to that statement were just whistling past.
Alia
My answer is that only commercial interests, would respect your
copyright.
My suggestion is that you don't post images you don't want
re-distributed in a public place.
Personal items could be covered by privacy. I don't see it useful in
the context of copyright.
For obvious reasons I do not wish to discuss children as a subject
anymore.
I suggest personal material e.g a private letter, can substitute for
the purposes of the debate.
-
Sent via the backstage.bbc.co.uk discussion group. To unsubscribe,
please visit
http://backstage.bbc.co.uk/archives/2005/01/mailing_list.html.
Unofficial list archive:
http://www.mail-archive.com/backstage@lists.bbc.co.uk/
-
Sent via the backstage.bbc.co.uk discussion group. To unsubscribe, please
visit http://backstage.bbc.co.uk/archives/2005/01/mailing_list.html.
Unofficial list archive: http://www.mail-archive.com/backstage@lists.bbc.co.uk/
