I have great respect for Chuck Close's work. I think, no matter how wrong he might be in this matter, he handled his correspondence with respect. I however wish he would have just asked to have his name removed from the project. At least by his direct communication, I can keep some respect for the man.
His style came from surviving horrendous physical tragedy and emotional pain; I completely understand his urge to keep a tight grip on the style that allowed him to keep working.
That being said, his actions are an over-reach in my opinion, but understandable from a human perspective.
Yeah, that article makes me want to write on my ID that I'll give my organs only if they put me under. Not sure if that would hold any legal value though.
``I wish to be left alone,'' said Scrooge. ``Since you ask me what I wish, gentlemen, that is my answer. I don't make merry myself at Christmas and I can't afford to make idle people merry. I help to support the establishments I have mentioned: they cost enough: and those who are badly off must go there.''
``Many can't go there; and many would rather die.''
``If they would rather die,'' said Scrooge, ``they had better do it, and decrease the surplus population. Besides -- excuse me -- I don't know that.''
``But you might know it,'' observed the gentleman.
``It's not my business,'' Scrooge returned. ``It's enough for a man to understand his own business, and not to interfere with other people's. Mine occupies me constantly. Good afternoon, gentlemen!''
Seeing clearly that it would be useless to pursue their point, the gentlemen withdrew. Scrooge resumed his labours with an improved opinion of himself, and in a more facetious temper than was usual with him.
I'm confused by something and maybe someone can explain it to me. What are the filters looking for that are blocking websites? Is it an actual person deciding what is blocked or just an algorithm (algorithm might not be the right word)? Is it the amount of skin tone colors on the site or human forms that trigger them? Is it text or video? If I linked to a site that was a full page of html color #FFE0A3 (skin color-ish) would it be blocked? Just curious.
I'm watching them debate CISPA on C-SPAN right now. I wish I could reach through my screen and launch water balloons at them with a trebuchet. It would make me feel better.
So theoretically, lets say the publisher of the book doesn't own the photo, but only has a license to use it.
Would that mean then that if you could find the original photographer you could potentially get the permission from him/her to use it? Are there any circumstances where the original photograph could be public domain?
Sorry if you answered these questions already, I'm just trying to better understand, and after awhile none of it makes sense.
Or could you make a reasonable facsimile of the photo in question?
I'm an artist and fair use confuses the hell out of me. Does anyone know of a website or community forum that would be able to look at an artist's piece and discuss whether or not it is considered fair use?
I read quite a bit about fair use/copyright/trademarks, but when it comes to looking at my own work, I'm too close to the pieces to decide if it's "legal" or not.
Re: Aww yeah
Popcorn has gotten old in this case. Time to move forward. I demand Chex mix.
Re: Chuck Close
I have great respect for Chuck Close's work. I think, no matter how wrong he might be in this matter, he handled his correspondence with respect. I however wish he would have just asked to have his name removed from the project. At least by his direct communication, I can keep some respect for the man.
His style came from surviving horrendous physical tragedy and emotional pain; I completely understand his urge to keep a tight grip on the style that allowed him to keep working.
That being said, his actions are an over-reach in my opinion, but understandable from a human perspective.
Re: Re: I don't normally do this....
This worries me as well. Does fair use just disappear if this goes through?
Re:
This is because it is cheaper for Verizon to hire hit-men than keep you as a customer.
Re:
Yeah, that article makes me want to write on my ID that I'll give my organs only if they put me under. Not sure if that would hold any legal value though.
Re: Dancing
Hell no; the fee should be waived. It's the only dance that makes everyone look equally stupid.
However, if they show up and dance, I'll happily see it as a performance and pay them.
Re: Re: Ginger Games
``You wish to be anonymous?''
``I wish to be left alone,'' said Scrooge. ``Since you ask me what I wish, gentlemen, that is my answer. I don't make merry myself at Christmas and I can't afford to make idle people merry. I help to support the establishments I have mentioned: they cost enough: and those who are badly off must go there.''
``Many can't go there; and many would rather die.''
``If they would rather die,'' said Scrooge, ``they had better do it, and decrease the surplus population. Besides -- excuse me -- I don't know that.''
``But you might know it,'' observed the gentleman.
``It's not my business,'' Scrooge returned. ``It's enough for a man to understand his own business, and not to interfere with other people's. Mine occupies me constantly. Good afternoon, gentlemen!''
Seeing clearly that it would be useless to pursue their point, the gentlemen withdrew. Scrooge resumed his labours with an improved opinion of himself, and in a more facetious temper than was usual with him.
Re: Re: This is not censorship
I love you for this reference.
I'm confused by something and maybe someone can explain it to me. What are the filters looking for that are blocking websites? Is it an actual person deciding what is blocked or just an algorithm (algorithm might not be the right word)? Is it the amount of skin tone colors on the site or human forms that trigger them? Is it text or video? If I linked to a site that was a full page of html color #FFE0A3 (skin color-ish) would it be blocked? Just curious.
Time of death: sometime in the very near future.
Goodbye Kodak. I am sad I never got to use Kodachrome film. It's horrible that this historic company died from self-inflicted wounds.
Re: Circumvention
Crap. How do I delete a multiple post? Is it possible? My mouse locked up.
Re: Circumvention
#5 http://www.cracked.com/article_19022_5-ways-hi-tech-retailers-are-secretly-screwing-you.html
Re: Re:
My friend buys special socks from Nike and yes, they have L and R on them. It drives me insane when I find 3 L's on the floor and no R in sight.
I'm watching them debate CISPA on C-SPAN right now. I wish I could reach through my screen and launch water balloons at them with a trebuchet. It would make me feel better.
Re: Re: copyright permissions
Also, sorry if it isn't a photo being referred to in the original article.
Re: copyright permissions
So theoretically, lets say the publisher of the book doesn't own the photo, but only has a license to use it.
Would that mean then that if you could find the original photographer you could potentially get the permission from him/her to use it? Are there any circumstances where the original photograph could be public domain?
Sorry if you answered these questions already, I'm just trying to better understand, and after awhile none of it makes sense.
Or could you make a reasonable facsimile of the photo in question?
Re:
Why so angry? If anything, this post has lead me to research even more about fair use (not that I'll make sense of it).
Not sure why I'm feeding the troll.
Is there?
I'm an artist and fair use confuses the hell out of me. Does anyone know of a website or community forum that would be able to look at an artist's piece and discuss whether or not it is considered fair use?
I read quite a bit about fair use/copyright/trademarks, but when it comes to looking at my own work, I'm too close to the pieces to decide if it's "legal" or not.
Re: Re: still one of my favorite patents
...but still fun yes? You totally missed the fun.
still one of my favorite patents
I have a somewhat questionably fun hobby of reading patents. This is one of my all time favorites: http://www.google.com/patents/US20060228983