Pretty good there, Bob! <g> Totally clear and understandable. keith
Bob Blakely wrote: > > From: "Mishka" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > > > > > And what is wrong with this? > > > > > > Boz has a clear copyright statement on his site, that's what. > > > > Boz has copyright on camera specs? Or on use tables? Or on listing specs > in > > a particular order? > > No, Boz does not have a copyright on camera specs, tables or on listing > specs in a particular order and you know this. You are being sarcastic in > the hops of showing someone up. > > The artwork used to display the information is copyrighted per his copyright > statement. It's called technical art and I do a lot of this with my camera. > If you photograph a famous statue which itself is not copyrighted, you may > nevertheless copyright the photograph as your rendition of the statue. This > is in spite of the fact that you hold no copyright on the statue, your > camera, the film or your camera's viewpoint when the photo was taken. > > A piece of music may be in the public domain and played on instruments whose > design and construction are in the public domain and recorded, but if you > make a copy of the recording by a particular musician and use it for your > own commercial purposes - even if you give credit to the musician, you can > be sued for copyright infringement and you will loose in court. This is > because what is protected is the musicians rendition of the public domain > work. > > > > > If someone think other people shouldn't use what's on their *PUBLIC* > web > > > > pages, well, they shouldn't have made them public in the first place. > > > > > > By this line of reasoning, anyone can copy any author's or artist's > > published > > > work found anywhere; is that really what you're suggesting? > > > > Do you mind that I quote your email without explicit permission? > > When a letter or e-mail is sent, permission for the addressee to *read* the > material is explicitly given. In the case of a letter, the addressee owns > the paper he was sent; the originator still owns the words. While use of > copyrighted material for commercial purposes requires explicit permission, > use of said material for editorial review is considered "fair use". This is > what I'm doing right now, that is, subjecting your post to editorial review. > > This is NOT a good review. > > Regards, > Bob.... > -------------------------------------------------------------------- > "Going to war without France is like going deer hunting without an > accordion." > -- Jed Babbit (Former US Under-secretary of Defense)
