On Thursday 10 April 2008 15:46, Ralf Gerlich wrote:
Hi!
LeeE wrote:
[...], there should be nothing to prevent a photographer from
taking a photograph of the Eiffel Tower lights and exhibiting
it to others, as long as they don't do so for profit, because
it's their personal view and
LeeE skrev:
I was thinking more along the lines of publicly displaying the photo
in an exhibition, which I don't think could be regarded as
distribution,
I suspect the RIAA and MPAA would disagree...
as opposed to selling copies of it, which would be
classed as distribution.
On Friday 11 April 2008 12:17, Ove Kaaven wrote:
LeeE skrev:
I was thinking more along the lines of publicly displaying the
photo in an exhibition, which I don't think could be regarded
as distribution,
I suspect the RIAA and MPAA would disagree...
as opposed to selling copies of it,
LeeE wrote:
On Friday 11 April 2008 12:17, Ove Kaaven wrote:
LeeE skrev:
I was thinking more along the lines of publicly displaying the
photo in an exhibition, which I don't think could be regarded
as distribution,
I suspect the RIAA and MPAA would disagree...
Why are we discussing the term
http://www.johnmacneill.com/WWII_Bomber.html
http://www.eff.org/deeplinks/2008/04/liberate-b-24-liberator
m.
-
This SF.net email is sponsored by the 2008 JavaOne(SM) Conference
Don't miss this year's exciting event. There's
On Thursday 10 April 2008 11:33, Melchior FRANZ wrote:
http://www.johnmacneill.com/WWII_Bomber.html
http://www.eff.org/deeplinks/2008/04/liberate-b-24-liberator
m.
Thanks for posting that.
I think the EFF article has the best take on it - it was not
appropriate grant the term B-24 as a
* LeeE -- Thursday 10 April 2008:
Thanks for posting that.
BTW: the discussion about the first link is also interesting:
http://www.boingboing.net/2008/03/21/wwii-bomber-trademar.html
m.
-
This SF.net email is sponsored
7 matches
Mail list logo
