But if you give a person the original, there is a lot of debate about the copyrights.
This wasn't a copy of the tape, but the actual only original tape. Jerry Johnson >>> [EMAIL PROTECTED] 07/29/03 04:56PM >>> Actually YES, YES, YES. In America the creation of a work is the creation of an implied copyright and giving a person a copy of that work makes no difference on the copyright. Agree or Disagree, that is the current state of things. -------------- Ian Skinner Web Programmer BloodSource Sacramento, CA -----Original Message----- From: William Wheatley [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Tuesday, July 29, 2003 1:54 PM To: CF-Community Subject: Re: Fat Brat sues Is everything copyrighted even when you don't put an explicit copyright on it? Is anything you shoot implied copyright? And does your implied copyright get waived when you GIVE the material to someone else without any words about it. All this is moot since we're talking about American law when its Looney law but still fun to debate it lol ----- Original Message ----- From: "Kevin Graeme" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> To: "CF-Community" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Sent: Tuesday, July 29, 2003 3:29 PM Subject: RE: Fat Brat sues > It's covered under copyright law. If I made that photo, I have the > exclusive right to determine how it's used until the copyright runs out. > If I don't want it shown to anyone, I can sue anyone who does show it. > Even printed photos in, say, a magazine are covered. It would be just as > illegal for someone to scan that photo and post it to a web page without > my permission. Same with a video. > > IANAL > > -Kevin > > > -----Original Message----- > > From: Dana Tierney [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] > > Sent: Tuesday, July 29, 2003 1:39 PM > > To: CF-Community > > Subject: Re: Fat Brat sues > > > > > > it would seem so. My business law class only covered > > commercial law in the US, but take a look at the lawyer > > interview; that seems to be what he is saying. > > > > Dana > > > > William Wheatley writes: > > > > > So if i leave a photo in canada somewhere and several > > months later a > > > friend finds it and to play a joke on me puts it on the web > > thats an > > > invasion of my privacy? > > > > > > ----- Original Message ----- > > > From: "Dana Tierney" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > > > To: "CF-Community" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > > > Sent: Monday, July 28, 2003 6:54 PM > > > Subject: Re: Fat Brat sues > > > > > > > > > > that might be the more mature way to go. But so the kid isn't > > > > mature. He > > > is > > > > what, 14? And he wasn't looking to be famous, especially not for > > > > this. People who have not put themselves in the public eye have a > > > > right to be left alone. That is an even stronger principle in > > > > Canadian law than it is here. The precendent involves a > > picture of a > > > > girl sitting on the steps of > > > a > > > > school looking pretty and reading a book. And *that* was > > ruled to be > > > > an invasion of her privacy which could not be distributed without > > > > her permission. > > > > > > > > Dana > > > > > > > > > > > > William Wheatley writes: > > > > > > > > > And on top of that HE made the tape, they didn't record it > > > > > > > > > > If hes so freaking embarassed by it why did he make the > > tape?? I > > > > > mean > > > laugh > > > > > i tup you got internet famous > > > > > you might get a part in a movie lighten up lol > > > > > > > > > > ----- Original Message ----- > > > > > From: "Haggerty, Mike" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > > > > > To: "CF-Community" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > > > > > Sent: Monday, July 28, 2003 3:37 PM > > > > > Subject: RE: Fat Brat sues > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Bill, I got to disagree with you on this one. I think the > > > > > > actions of those kids was intended to publicly humiliate this > > > > > > kid and that they > > > had > > > > > > no right to put that up without his permission. If the kid is > > > > > > traumatized as a result, he should have the right to > > sue. This > > > > > > should > > > be > > > > > > regardless of the fact they made money off the action, the > > > > > > question is whether or not they hurt this person in some > > > > > > meaningful way. My take > > > on > > > > > > it is, yes, they did. > > > > > > > > > > > > M > > > > > > > > > > > > -----Original Message----- > > > > > > From: William Wheatley [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] > > > > > > Sent: Monday, July 28, 2003 3:30 PM > > > > > > To: CF-Community > > > > > > Subject: Re: Fat Brat sues > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Sure file a criminal complaint. > > > > > > > > > > > > And if they MADE money off it sue, or sue to get it > > removed but > > > > > > this emotional distress crap has gotten way out of > > hand. People > > > > > > can't deal with life so they have to get money to get > > comfort. > > > > > > The problem is > > > even > > > > > > spreading to canada now :) Oh boy that can be the american > > > > > > legacy a bunch of whiney people who gotta sue for everything. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~| Archives: http://www.houseoffusion.com/cf_lists/index.cfm?forumid=5 Subscription: http://www.houseoffusion.com/cf_lists/index.cfm?method=subscribe&forumid=5 This list and all House of Fusion resources hosted by CFHosting.com. The place for dependable ColdFusion Hosting. http://www.cfhosting.com Unsubscribe: http://www.houseoffusion.com/cf_lists/unsubscribe.cfm?user=89.70.5
