--- In videoblogging@yahoogroups.com, "Andreas Haugstrup Pedersen" <[EMAIL 
PROTECTED]> 
wrote:

> Hey, I'm not worried. 

hey, I am!!! :-)

Andreas seems to think that most of the litigation we need to protect us in the 
future has 
been settled, and we just need to educate ourselves and it will be ok, 
especially if people 
shoot their footage "ethically."

It's when people say "screw ethics" or when their ethics don't match mine that 
i want the 
courts to set some kind of common ground agreement for us all.

For example, Andreas said earlier...

"If I'm filming you while you stand at the bus stop with a funny look on
your face, you have no measures to stop me from mailing that footage to
every person in the world. .... if you're just standing there, you have no 
protection. And 
nor should you have! "

Well, you say "nor should you have" but I say "yes i should!" (well, maybe I 
say that and 
maybe i don't, i'm not sure, I'm just illustrating my point). -- I could argue 
that "a 
reasonable expectation of privacy" relates to you looking at me on the bus, but 
it is a very 
different situation when we're talking about every one in the entire world 
looking at me on 
the bus forever whenever they want to, especially if I didn't give permission 
for that. 

being  seen or even photographed in public is not really the same thing as 
being 
reproduced and distributed worldwide, and this is the sitution i was talking 
about when i 
brought this up. 

Someone says I should have no further protection, I say I should have, well 
yes, we can all 
say whatever we want, can't we? None of it is enforceable unless the courts 
address the 
specific situations with the new technlogy we have, and I just still feel that, 
even with all 
the similar cases from the past, the specifics of this sort of thing could use 
a bit more 
legal work.

[Andreas said about using copyrighted music for non-cmmercial purposes]:

> That's not up to you to decide (and nor should it be). It is the creator's  
> right to decide when, how and where his work should be reproduced.  
> Exceptions are of course Fair Use for commentary, parody and the like.

Yeah, my face should have the same protection, shouldn't it (if the song "Baby 
Got Back" 
can be protected against non-commercial reproduction and distribution, why 
can't I?)? i 
didn't create it, but I have an awful lot invested in it!

Again, i know the courts haven't granted me that protection yet. What I'm 
saying is that 
they maybe should! And soon, before the technology races any farther ahead.

Thanks for the interesting discussion!

Dave





------------------------ Yahoo! Groups Sponsor --------------------~--> 
Get Bzzzy! (real tools to help you find a job). Welcome to the Sweet Life.
http://us.click.yahoo.com/A77XvD/vlQLAA/TtwFAA/lBLqlB/TM
--------------------------------------------------------------------~-> 

 
Yahoo! Groups Links

<*> To visit your group on the web, go to:
    http://groups.yahoo.com/group/videoblogging/

<*> To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to:
    [EMAIL PROTECTED]

<*> Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to:
    http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/
 


Reply via email to