A Photography forum. PhotoBanter.com

If this is your first visit, be sure to check out the FAQ by clicking the link above. You may have to register before you can post: click the register link above to proceed. To start viewing messages, select the forum that you want to visit from the selection below.

Go Back   Home » PhotoBanter.com forum » Digital Photography » Digital Photography
Site Map Home Register Authors List Search Today's Posts Mark Forums Read Web Partners

Rear Window 500/8 Mirror



 
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
  #41  
Old May 23rd 18, 06:35 PM posted to rec.photo.digital
nospam
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 24,165
Default Rear Window 500/8 Mirror

In article , David B.
wrote:

once again, you're trying to weasel out of having stolen other people's
content.

I've stolen nothing.


actually, you did. you stole his intellectual property and used it
without his permission.


I stole NOTHING. I posted a link, nothing more.


except that the link was not yours to repost.

it was *someone* *else's* *photo* and which you used *without* *their*
*permission*.


This link works .... now:-

https://www.cat-lovers-only.com/imag...8chR33SzqK.jpg

It did NOT work this morning.


yes it did, and worked yesterday, the day before, all the way back to
whenever it was originally posted.

you ****ed up again and refuse to acknowledge it.
  #42  
Old May 23rd 18, 06:46 PM posted to rec.photo.digital
David B.[_2_]
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 195
Default Rear Window 500/8 Mirror

On 23-May-18 6:35 PM, nospam wrote:
In article , David B.
wrote:

once again, you're trying to weasel out of having stolen other people's
content.

I've stolen nothing.

actually, you did. you stole his intellectual property and used it
without his permission.


I stole NOTHING. I posted a link, nothing more.


except that the link was not yours to repost.


Links on Usenet are free for anyone to use as they see fit.

it was *someone* *else's* *photo* and which you used *without* *their*
*permission*.


I posted a link - Savageduck had/has full control of what is given away
there.

This link works .... now:-

https://www.cat-lovers-only.com/imag...8chR33SzqK.jpg

It did NOT work this morning.


yes it did, and worked yesterday, the day before, all the way back to
whenever it was originally posted.

you ****ed up again and refuse to acknowledge it.


More lies! :-(

--
David B.

  #43  
Old May 23rd 18, 07:24 PM posted to rec.photo.digital
nospam
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 24,165
Default Rear Window 500/8 Mirror

In article , David B.
wrote:

once again, you're trying to weasel out of having stolen other people's
content.

I've stolen nothing.

actually, you did. you stole his intellectual property and used it
without his permission.

I stole NOTHING. I posted a link, nothing more.


except that the link was not yours to repost.


Links on Usenet are free for anyone to use as they see fit.


absolutely false.
  #44  
Old May 23rd 18, 07:37 PM posted to rec.photo.digital
PeterN[_7_]
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 1,161
Default Rear Window 500/8 Mirror

On 5/23/2018 8:38 AM, -hh wrote:
On Wednesday, May 23, 2018 at 6:53:58 AM UTC-4, android wrote:
On 2018-05-23 10:21:56 +0000, Whisky-dave said:

[attributions]

Technically it is stealing.

Which it is seen as.
[...]


No it's not. Downloading third party material and then uploading it is
stealing. With hotlinking the picture remains on your chosen server and
thus under your control and not stolen. Feel free to change those
laws... Again:

https://photocopyrightlaw.com/can-embedding-hotlinking-or-inline-linking-constitute-copyright-infringement/


https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Inline...s_that_inline_


An interesting legal perspective, although I'd make a counterpoint
that it really should depend on just how the hotlinking was done.
IMO, its one thing if the hotlinked image had been dutifully attributed
to its copyright owner, but if it was misrepresented as belonging
to the one who did the hotlink, that's entirely a different story.

When I've happened to have found hotlinks that fall more into the
category of the latter, a strategy that I've taken at times is to
change the image out from underneath them, so that they're linked
to something different than they intended. Here's an example:

http://huntzinger.com/photo/2002/germany/euros.jpg

FWIW, some people have reportedly chosen alternative images which
are vastly less ... civilized.


When I post an image in DB, I usually do a low res image, or put a
copyright notice on it. If anyone asked what technique I used to make
the image, I will share that info, to the extent I remember what I did,
as well as tell them where the image was taken. I have also given some
people high res images so they can make print for their personal use. I
have even gone so far as to change the ICC profile, if needed, and
adjust the print for expected lighting conditions, at no cost. What I do
not want, and will not tolerate is using my work without my permission,
or making derivations from my work, without my permission. IOW I will
**** away thousands of dollars, but react badly if you try to steal a
penny from me.


--
PeterN
  #45  
Old May 23rd 18, 07:50 PM posted to rec.photo.digital
PeterN[_7_]
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 1,161
Default Rear Window 500/8 Mirror

On 5/23/2018 10:57 AM, nospam wrote:
In article ,
Whisky-dave wrote:

If you upload an image (that you don't own) to a site and you don't
distrubute it or let anyone else see it you can count it as a backup even if
it isn't your own.


wrong.


Almost agree. If it is my site, and I simply want to enjoy the image as
is, I think its within fair use. If it's to another site, you are
probably correct. Interpretations of "fair use" differ in different
jurisdictions. I won't even pretend to guess what is or isn't fair use
in GB.


--
PeterN
  #46  
Old May 23rd 18, 07:54 PM posted to rec.photo.digital
PeterN[_7_]
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 1,161
Default Rear Window 500/8 Mirror

On 5/23/2018 1:14 PM, nospam wrote:
In article , David B.
wrote:

On 22-May-18 11:12 PM, Savageduck wrote:
Regardless of my CC by-nc-sa license, I would expect the courtesy to
advise
me of your intention to post that DB link on Facebook which I personally
never use.

I don't understand your license reference.

CC = Creative Commons

Thank you. I'm fairly sure that you've told me previously that I could
share you images if I wished.

somehow i doubt that.

once again, you're trying to weasel out of having stolen other people's
content.


I've stolen nothing.


actually, you did. you stole his intellectual property and used it
without his permission.

Savageduck still has his fantastic image of the
Cheetah. I'm now wishing that I *had* downloaded and kept a copy. My
loss, that's for sure. :-(


digging yourself an even deeper hole.

You just have to choose an appropriate cat.

https://www.cat-lovers-only.com/imag...on-litter-box-
375.jpg.pagespeed.ic.8chR33SzqK.jpg

I get "Sorry, there's no such page here"

that's because you're an idiot.


No, I'm not.


true. you're dumber than an idiot.
you being an idiot would be an improvement.


FYI
"Idiots.—Those so defective that the mental development never exceeds
that or a normal child of about two years.
Imbeciles.—Those whose development is higher than that of an idiot, but
whose intelligence does not exceed that of a normal child of about seven
years.
Morons.—Those whose mental development is above that of an imbecile, but
does not exceed that of a normal child of about twelve years."
— Edmund Burke Huey, Backward and Feeble-Minded Children, 1912



--
PeterN
  #47  
Old May 23rd 18, 08:19 PM posted to rec.photo.digital
Savageduck[_3_]
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 16,487
Default Rear Window 500/8 Mirror

On May 23, 2018, PeterN wrote
(in article ):

On 5/23/2018 8:38 AM, -hh wrote:
On Wednesday, May 23, 2018 at 6:53:58 AM UTC-4, android wrote:
On 2018-05-23 10:21:56 +0000, Whisky-dave said:

[attributions]

Technically it is stealing.

Which it is seen as.
[...]

No it's not. Downloading third party material and then uploading it is
stealing. With hotlinking the picture remains on your chosen server and
thus under your control and not stolen. Feel free to change those
laws... Again:

https://photocopyrightlaw.com/can-em...line-linking-c
onstitute-copyright-infringement/


https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Inline...ssues_that_inl
ine_


An interesting legal perspective, although I'd make a counterpoint
that it really should depend on just how the hotlinking was done.
IMO, its one thing if the hotlinked image had been dutifully attributed
to its copyright owner, but if it was misrepresented as belonging
to the one who did the hotlink, that's entirely a different story.

When I've happened to have found hotlinks that fall more into the
category of the latter, a strategy that I've taken at times is to
change the image out from underneath them, so that they're linked
to something different than they intended. Here's an example:

http://huntzinger.com/photo/2002/germany/euros.jpg

FWIW, some people have reportedly chosen alternative images which
are vastly less ... civilized.


When I post an image in DB, I usually do a low res image, or put a
copyright notice on it. If anyone asked what technique I used to make
the image, I will share that info, to the extent I remember what I did,
as well as tell them where the image was taken. I have also given some
people high res images so they can make print for their personal use. I
have even gone so far as to change the ICC profile, if needed, and
adjust the print for expected lighting conditions, at no cost. What I do
not want, and will not tolerate is using my work without my permission,
or making derivations from my work, without my permission. IOW I will
**** away thousands of dollars, but react badly if you try to steal a
penny from me.


;-)

--

Regards,
Savageduck

  #48  
Old May 23rd 18, 08:27 PM posted to rec.photo.digital
David B.[_2_]
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 195
Default Rear Window 500/8 Mirror

On 23-May-18 7:54 PM, PeterN wrote:
On 5/23/2018 1:14 PM, nospam wrote:
In article , David B.
wrote:

On 22-May-18 11:12 PM, Savageduck wrote:
Regardless of my CC by-nc-sa license, I would expect the
courtesy to
advise
me of your intention to post that DB link on Facebook which I
personally
never use.

I don't understand your license reference.

CC = Creative Commons

Thank you. I'm fairly sure that you've told me previously that I could
share you images if I wished.

somehow i doubt that.

once again, you're trying to weasel out of having stolen other people's
content.

I've stolen nothing.


actually, you did. you stole his intellectual property and used it
without his permission.

Savageduck still has his fantastic image of the
Cheetah. I'm now wishing that I *had* downloaded and kept a copy. My
loss, that's for sure. :-(


digging yourself an even deeper hole.

You just have to choose an appropriate cat.

https://www.cat-lovers-only.com/imag...on-litter-box-
375.jpg.pagespeed.ic.8chR33SzqK.jpg

I get "Sorry, there's no such page here"

that's because you're an idiot.

No, I'm not.


true. you're dumber than an idiot.
you being an idiot would be an improvement.


FYI
"Idiots.—Those so defective that the mental development never exceeds
that or a normal child of about two years.
Imbeciles.—Those whose development is higher than that of an idiot, but
whose intelligence does not exceed that of a normal child of about seven
years.
Morons.—Those whose mental development is above that of an imbecile, but
does not exceed that of a normal child of about twelve years."
— Edmund Burke Huey, Backward and Feeble-Minded Children, 1912



Thank you for providing the evidence of nospam's lies! :-)

--
David B.


  #49  
Old May 23rd 18, 08:41 PM posted to rec.photo.digital
nospam
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 24,165
Default Rear Window 500/8 Mirror

In article , PeterN
wrote:

https://www.cat-lovers-only.com/imag...on-litter-box-
375.jpg.pagespeed.ic.8chR33SzqK.jpg

I get "Sorry, there's no such page here"

that's because you're an idiot.

No, I'm not.


true. you're dumber than an idiot.
you being an idiot would be an improvement.


FYI
"Idiots.‹Those so defective that the mental development never exceeds
that or a normal child of about two years.
Imbeciles.‹Those whose development is higher than that of an idiot, but
whose intelligence does not exceed that of a normal child of about seven
years.
Morons.‹Those whose mental development is above that of an imbecile, but
does not exceed that of a normal child of about twelve years."
‹ Edmund Burke Huey, Backward and Feeble-Minded Children, 1912


yep.

a better comparison would be to bacteria.
  #50  
Old May 24th 18, 10:33 AM posted to rec.photo.digital
android
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 3,854
Default Rear Window 500/8 Mirror

On 2018-05-24 09:16:59 +0000, Whisky-dave said:

On Wednesday, 23 May 2018 17:01:34 UTC+1, android wrote:
On 2018-05-23 12:51:19 +0000, Whisky-dave said:

Uploading isn't stealing .


In extenso then It sure is.


what is extenso ?


In extenso... https://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/in%20extenso

Unless you have secured the rights to the
material.


Not true


Believe me, it is...

You're publicising something


Uploading to a server is NOT publicising.


It sure is if you're making it available to the public...

Otherwise everyone that backed up to a cloud service would be charged
with theft.


Depending what it sthat they are backing up...

that you don't own for your own
purposes. Quotations are different


You are allowed to backup what ever is on you computer or tablet.


As long as you have the right to have it on it...

--
teleportation kills

 




Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

vB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is Off
HTML code is Off
Forum Jump

Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
Rear cover foam in an old SLR Chris Loffredo 35mm Photo Equipment 1 February 17th 06 08:58 PM
Rear cover foam in an old SLR Mike 35mm Photo Equipment 0 February 17th 06 04:47 PM
Rear tilt focus? [email protected] Large Format Photography Equipment 28 April 20th 05 12:41 AM
WTB: 2d rear extension & other discussion Collin Brendemuehl Large Format Equipment For Sale 2 September 30th 04 06:02 PM
will frequent use of mirror lockup shorten lifespan of mirror mechanism? Mxsmanic 35mm Photo Equipment 9 August 16th 04 06:13 PM


All times are GMT +1. The time now is 11:51 AM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.6.4
Copyright ©2000 - 2024, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Copyright ©2004-2024 PhotoBanter.com.
The comments are property of their posters.