Reader Comments (rss)

(Flattened / Threaded)

1.  

   

   dorpus, Jun 1st, 2006 @ 1:54am

   
   

   IP of pictures on the net?

   I created a Travel Guide to Japan, based on my personal biases. I used pictures lying around on the net to illustrate my points. If the pictures don't say "copyrighted", it's legal, am I right?

    

   [ reply to this | link to this | view in thread ]

2.  

   

   Anonymous Coward, Jun 1st, 2006 @ 2:15am

   
   

   heh

   Of course, as with the US brainwashing campaign, it will likely turn out that many kids are smart enough to see that the lessons are bogus, and will have no problem saying so.

   They shouldn't have to be. What kind of school would allow the reps into the school in the first place?

    

   [ reply to this | link to this | view in thread ]

3.  

   

   Ben Robinson, Jun 1st, 2006 @ 2:16am

   
   

   re: IP of pictures on the net?

   Copyright is very complicated and varies between countries but basically, no it probably isn't legal. If someone creates something (i.e. an artistic or creative work) then they own the copyright automatically in most countries. There is no requirement to register or mark copyrighted works.

    

   [ reply to this | link to this | view in thread ]

4.  

   

   dorpus, Jun 1st, 2006 @ 2:18am

   
   

   Re: re: IP of pictures on the net?

   If I were not using it for commercial purposes, would it still be illegal though? We're talking about pictures taken by other tourists.

    

   [ reply to this | link to this | view in thread ]

5.  

   

   Anonymous Coward, Jun 1st, 2006 @ 2:24am

   
   

   Re: Re: re: IP of pictures on the net?

   Breaching copyright has nothing to do with whether you are doint it for commercial purposes or not. If i put up a website containing no ads and made available for free, all of the beatles songs as MP3 downloads, i would make no money out of it, but I would still be breaching copyright. However you have to remeber that if you breach someones copyright they can only really do anything about it if they have the money and motivation to sue you. A bunch of random tourists are unlikely to sue you for using their holiday snaps in a website. It's not worth spending $10,000 to get someone to take your holiday snaps offline.

    

   [ reply to this | link to this | view in thread ]

6.  

   

   dorpus, Jun 1st, 2006 @ 2:29am

   
   

   That's exactly what I figured. Most of the tourist pics weren't even taken by Americans anyway -- they'd have to come after me internationally. In the unlikely event someone comes after me, I'll just change pics.

    

   [ reply to this | link to this | view in thread ]

7.  

   

   Anonymous Coward, Jun 1st, 2006 @ 2:30am

   
   

   Re: IP of pictures on the net?

   Its legal most of the time.....

    

   [ reply to this | link to this | view in thread ]

8.  

   

   Yo Yo Yo!, Jun 1st, 2006 @ 2:40am

   
   

   Don't Copy That Floppy! Worked Foe me when i was a

   Fo Sizzle!
   http://video.google.com/videoplay?docid=-420663394921441084&q=Copy+That+Floppy

    

   [ reply to this | link to this | view in thread ]

9.  

   

   icepick314, Jun 1st, 2006 @ 2:48am

   
   

   Captain Who???

   Is Captain Copyright related to Captain Planet, who saves the Earth from the evil poluters of the world?

    

   [ reply to this | link to this | view in thread ]

10.  

    

    Chris, Jun 1st, 2006 @ 4:09am

    
    

    Teaching Kids how to spell?

    "The years of Resrearch, the writing...How can he do this to us?!"
    
    http://www.captaincopyright.ca/Kids/Comic5.aspx

     

    [ reply to this | link to this | view in thread ]

11.  

    

    Anonymous Coward, Jun 1st, 2006 @ 4:12am

    
    

    Captain Copyright and Captain planet are lovers...possibiliy related but definately lovers.

     

    [ reply to this | link to this | view in thread ]

12.  

    

    Diivva, Jun 1st, 2006 @ 6:12am

    
    

    Re: IP of pictures on the net?

    "Intellectual property" refers to original creations in the fields of literature and the arts. Most countries in the world provide automatic copyright protection to any item of intellectual property at the instant the item is created. At the instant a photo is taken, it automatically becomes the "intellectual property" of the photographer who took it. It makes no difference what the subject is or why the photograph was taken.
    
    Read more here:
    http://www.comstock.com/web/default.asp?IHF=/WEB/IHF/LICENSE/IHFLICENSEPIRACY.ASP

     

    [ reply to this | link to this | view in thread ]

13.  

    

    Wolfger, Jun 1st, 2006 @ 6:17am

    
    

    Re: Re: Re: re: IP of pictures on the net?

    Right. Using somebody else's pictures without permission is in violation of U.S. copyright law, regardless of whether or not the copyright notice is posted. But illegal and prosecutable are two different things. To be prosecutable, the owner(s) of the picture(s) would have to be able to prove ownership, and would have to be able to afford to sue you. As ever, our legal system is heavily in favor of those who have money.
    
    So can you use these pictures? Sure. The chances of you being prosecuted are exceedingly slim.
    Should you use these pictures? Not without asking permission. In my experience, most people are happy to share. If I ask and get no answer, I treat that as a "yes". I figure if they can't be bothered to reply to my e-mail, they can't be bothered to sue me either.

     

    [ reply to this | link to this | view in thread ]

14.  

    

    L0ki, Jun 1st, 2006 @ 7:02am

    
    

    Re: Re: Re: Re: re: IP of pictures on the net?

    As pointed out depends on the countries. Aus is a great example, whilst you may breach copyright by using others works, that isnt actually a criminal offence, there is no way you could be prosecuted for it, and you could always claim fair use, which allows you to use 10% of any article etc. Also if you claim your a student fair use goes to 100% as long as you dont claim its your work thus rendering it almost impossible for you to be sued civilly. Seems the lawyers and the US in particular are still litigation mad.

     

    [ reply to this | link to this | view in thread ]

15.  

    

    blah, Jun 1st, 2006 @ 7:06am

    
    

    Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: re: IP of pictures on the net?

    No one likes Australia though...

     

    [ reply to this | link to this | view in thread ]

16.  

    

    L0ki, Jun 1st, 2006 @ 7:22am

    
    

    Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: re: IP of pictures on the

    you must have mis-spelt america :P but then with your education system its no surprise :D

     

    [ reply to this | link to this | view in thread ]

17.  

    

    Neal, Jun 1st, 2006 @ 7:24am

    
    

    Next Reps

    The tobacco industry reps will be scheduled after the copyright lesson showing kids the benefits of smoking and chewing. "Smoking helps you stay skinny, you don't need to brush 'cause your teeth will turn black anyway, and you will die younger and save taxpayers from supporting you until you are 85."

     

    [ reply to this | link to this | view in thread ]

18.  

    

    kurttrail, Jun 1st, 2006 @ 7:28am

    
    

    Re: IP of pictures on the net?

    As others have said, the photos are covered under copyright law whether on not it is marked as copyrighted.
    
    In the US, you can be sued, BUT you'd have a pretty damned good "fair use" defense.

     

    [ reply to this | link to this | view in thread ]

19.  

    

    Tyshaun, Jun 1st, 2006 @ 7:43am

    
    

    I wouldn't have a problem with this except...

    I really wouldn't have reps from the RIAA or MPAA come to schools and talk about copyright from their perspective HOWEVER I think it would only be educationally worthwhile to invite groups with opposing viewpoints and let them debate the issue. The kids get an opportunity to hear both sides of the arguement and make a real decision, as opposed to this obvious brainwashing.

     

    [ reply to this | link to this | view in thread ]

20.  

    

    Grateful for a smart mom, Jun 1st, 2006 @ 7:54am

    
    

    Re: heh

    Sorry, but WHO DO YOU THINK HAS BEEN WRITING THE TEXTBOOKS FOR THE LAST 100 YEARS? Seriously: Ever actually verified the "facts" in one of your kids' textbooks? Are you aware of the tremendous amount of errors which creep in (by faulty writing/research on the writers' parts, by faulty editing by the publishing staff, or by PURPOSEFUL INSERTION OF PERSONAL or CORPORATE BIAS by same)? And do the teachers 'check behind' to make sure it's right? You know they don't! With apologies to the fine teachers I had many decades ago, there are some true dodos out there merely parroting what the teachers' edition says, unaware of actual facts, and uncaring the quality of information they're imparting.

     

    [ reply to this | link to this | view in thread ]

21.  

    

    Phillip Vector, Jun 1st, 2006 @ 8:23am

    
    

    Just called

    I just called the company that puts out this book and spoke to a woman named susan. She stated that she wasn't a lawyer, but she can assure me that the company is in no position to sue anyone for linking to their website (it's in the disclaimer that you can't link to the website if it's negative).
    
    What surprised me is that she mentioned that they are working with teachers and will be putting out shortly other sides of the issue. Fair use, IP law, etc. She honestly sounded like they are interested in providing all sides of the issue.
    
    Let's see what happens, eh?

     

    [ reply to this | link to this | view in thread ]

22.  

    

    ehrichweiss, Jun 1st, 2006 @ 8:25am

    
    

    Re: heh

    If they get the same response out of this "war on piracy" the same as they got out of the War on Drugs, we won't have that to worry about soon enough. I mean with the losing streak on all the "wars" declared, we should declare a war on wealth so we could all be as rich as Bill Gates by the end of the week.
    
    War on Terrorism - losing
    War on Homelessness - lost
    War on Drugs - lost...TWICE if you count the previous Prohibition in the 30's

     

    [ reply to this | link to this | view in thread ]

23.  

    

    Its_Bo, Jun 1st, 2006 @ 8:45am

    
    

    ummm

    To the people with children...don't you find it the *least* bit disturbing that the school in your district is letting movie/music cops into your schools to *educate* your children on this matter? Not to mention the fact that what they are preaching *if* allowed to is skewed and totalitarian? I mean, does that assembly come with a free juice and lunch at least? Seriously, people wake up, they only seek to control you and the media you ingest. This really doesn't even have to do with movies or music...it's distribution of content(news, sports, advertising)and they want us to pay premium rate for them to control us.
    Weird huh?

     

    [ reply to this | link to this | view in thread ]

24.  

    

    Fearless Coward, Jun 1st, 2006 @ 9:13am

    
    

    Re: IP of pictures on the net?

    No, a copyright is assigned to the creator the moment the picture is created. It does not need to say 'copyright' for the copyright to be valid. (In the US).
    .
    I can't speak to whether or not your usage of those pictures in a personal (non-commercial) way is legal or not. If the usage was intended to be educational, then the usage is probably legal. That's Fair Use.

     

    [ reply to this | link to this | view in thread ]

25.  

    

    Anonymous Coward, Jun 1st, 2006 @ 9:25am

    
    

    Just say no

    Just stop listening to music and stop watching TV. It's just turning us into zombies anyways.

     

    [ reply to this | link to this | view in thread ]

26.  

    

    Brad, Jun 1st, 2006 @ 10:30am

    
    

    It's the schools

    Don't send your kids to tax funded, government run schools where bureaucrats and interest groups decide what garbage to shovel into young minds.

     

    [ reply to this | link to this | view in thread ]

27.  

    

    Harold Flath, Jun 1st, 2006 @ 12:27pm

    
    

    Captain copyright

    This is one more problem added to the list of our incompetent school system techniques of learning importance. Letting a biased industry get into the classroom and teach copyright is absurd. If they intend to let this happen, why don't they also let companies that produce steel products in to teach the students of the importance of buying items that will last longer, made of metal, over the cheap plastic products that you have to replace frequently. Why were at it, when are we going to teach the students how to count money, figure interest rates, proper use of credit cards, balancing a checkbook,,,,I could go on and on. Our school system is gradually going to pot. I'm a computer technician as well as a retail owner, and it is very obvious there are many countries that have a better education system than the US.. The evidence is there.
    Captain copyright needs to have his ship sunk, and his crew fed to the sharks.....

     

    [ reply to this | link to this | view in thread ]

28.  

    

    Wayne Goode, Jun 1st, 2006 @ 2:18pm

    
    

    Allowed?

    It seems odd that a clearly biased industry should be allowed to create the lesson that teaches young kids about such a topic.

    Seems odd that they are allowed? Not if you remember the 1st Ammendment to the US Constitution. Who should get to decide who can create lessons? Let anyone create the lessons and let the people who will teach the lessons choose what they want to use.

     

    [ reply to this | link to this | view in thread ]

29.  

    

    a product of the american educational system, Jun 1st, 2006 @ 2:49pm

    
    

    Re: Next Reps

    Neil, you obviously are not a product of the American government run educational system. If you were, you would know the official ministry of truth position that smoking costs the taxpayers because the government provides some of the medical costs when the smokers get sick and die before being able to enjoy a long retirement. Retirement is another subject all together so it is excluded from the debate entirely. The american arguement is that if you smoke you get sick and therefore cost the government money. If you don't smoke, you don't ever get sick and you never cost anything and can keep on working and paying taxes past the age of 85... that is why the goverment was able to win huge billion dollar extortion fees from the big tobacco companies. See, I am a product of the American education system.... and I know what you are going to say next. You are going to say that people will eventually get sick and die anyway, right? Well, you are obviously short-sighthed and are ignorning the problem of what our governement taught us was "the effects of second hand smoke". :)) LMAO

     

    [ reply to this | link to this | view in thread ]

30.  

    

    biffol, Jun 1st, 2006 @ 7:04pm

    
    

    observation

    It seems much activity is spent keeping religion out of the classroom, yet corporations have the power and will to spend resources on keeping control.

     

    [ reply to this | link to this | view in thread ]

31.  

    

    Rick Sarvas, Jun 2nd, 2006 @ 10:35am

    
    

    Hero rank

    On the lighter side of things...
    
    wouldn't Major Pirate outrank Captain Copyright?

     

    [ reply to this | link to this | view in thread ]

32.  

    

    Educated in America, Jun 4th, 2006 @ 10:49am

    
    

    Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: re: IP of pictures on

    Do they not teach punctuation in your country? >:-D

     

    [ reply to this | link to this | view in thread ]

Add Your Comment