William Robb wrote: >The whole copyright thing is somewhat out of control anyway. I can >certainly understand if a person stands to make money off of a >particular image, that they might be a little miffed with someone for >lifting it, but for most of us, we put pictures on the web because we >are vain, and we want our peers to look at what we've done and tell us >that we are jolly good photographers. >For those of us who do that, someone lifting one of our pictures costs >us nothing, and should be giving us exactly what we put the image on the >web for anyway. >Someone thinks we are a jolly good enough photographer to lift our >picture. As long as they give a credit and don't claim that they made >the image themselves (never condone dishonesty), what's the fuss?
I'm pretty sure the image lifted in this case was that of a professional photographer - he wouldn't have been able to sue and collect money if he hadn't actually registered his copyright with the copyright office - so this could represent a real loss of income for him/her. And we don't know how much this cost the blogger: 50 bucks would be considered a lot of money by some. That said, I completely agree with you that people get all too worked up over this stuff. I register the copyright of all my images before I put them on line. But when they do go on the web I give 99% of them Creative Commons licenses so they're free for most bloggers to use as long as they give credit and don't alter the images. -- Mark Roberts - Photography & Multimedia www.robertstech.com -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List [email protected] http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net to UNSUBSCRIBE from the PDML, please visit the link directly above and follow the directions.
