I can't wait for the day when these companies finds out how "whitelisting" works.
Yeah, I think you've misheard "them". What they were saying was "if we don't think you've done anything wrong, you have no reason to be concerned".
"They" get that misunderstanding ALL the time. At least that's what "They" told me.
"I've said this before: photographs do not deserve copyright protection because photographers do not need the incentive of copyright."
Clearly this applies to all copyright. There's no end to all the people who happily create without even considering copyright.
Ketchup IN your sausages? I think you might be doing it wrong...
The problem is that most people will think of rapists and pedophiles when they hear "sex-offender", even if the vast majority ends up being just drunk guys who had to pee.
"[...] IF THE PERSON KNOWS OR SHOULD HAVE KNOWN THAT THE DEPICTED PERSON HAS NOT CONSENTED TO THE DISCLOSURE."
I don't get it. How could you prove that someone knows, or should have known, that, for instance, the plane-lady weren't okay with it? For all you know she might get off on it.
Hang on, what do they mean "tones"? Do they mean "notes", cause two notes isn't even sampling, that's just music.
I'm confused.
That must be one hell of a flash, if he managed to disturb someone who probably wasn't even in the same building!
Also, what you are talking about has nothing to do with this. If I get thrown out because of my drunken River Dancing, I still expect to be allowed to post the video of it without the Library crying copyright-foul.
- The Metadata doesn't show anything important, nothing to see here.
- Then why are you collecting it in the first place?
Do you have any data to substantiate this claim?
That's not how we do things around here! We open the door when all but one are dead!
You savage!
But in that case they would just revoke the license instead, wouldn't they? All of a sudden you're not sitting on an unsupported OS, you're sitting on an illegal copy of an unsupported OS.
I would think it easier to just not have any direct presence in those countries. Although I don't know to what degree US courts would honor these messed up rulings and enforce them locally.
Doesn't the earplugs hinder you from hearing the music?
https://firstlook.org/theintercept/terms-use/
The problem isn't with the 0.1%, it's with the 99.9% that look the other way. When they don't demand that the 0.1% get's fired, they become part of the problem.
Although, wouldn't it be easier to find out what he took if it was truly stolen, rather than copied?
Unions in general, yes. But, at least according to my infallible sources (TV-shows), the Police Union (which I know remember isn't a thing) are supposed to defend their members in these circumstances.
I may have flawed logic, but at least I have it. I think.
Re: Do it!
Oh, they wouldn't dare. What they however WOULD dare to do is sue the people who made the statue and the people who payed for it into oblivion.