MicrostockGroup Sponsors


Author Topic: Court Rules Copying Photos Found on Internet is Fair Use  (Read 5426 times)

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

namussi

« Reply #25 on: July 05, 2018, 22:16 »
0
Brush up on your reading skills. He didnt say the wireless carriers were stealing photos, he said they are the ones making all the money.

Oh yeah? Just like this, in a sentence and thread about photo theft?

Maybe he just has hard time expressing his thoughts coherently in writting.

Maybe he only wanted to say that wireless carriers facilitated the growth of the internet.

Maybe he just wanted to say that billions of new users, accessing the internet wirelessly, are very hungry for media these days (photos included).

Maybe he just wanted to say that this increased demand has also incentivized thieves to steal more.

But between these potential interpretations and his unfounded claims about wireless carriers "making a fortune" as a consequence of this theft, there is a huge difference.

Mind you:
Sprint has 33 Billions of debt. Billions with B.
T-Mobile has 15 Billions of debt. Billions with B.
AT&T has 151 Billions of debt. Billions with B.
Verizon has 117 Billions of debt (at the end of 2017). Billions with B.

It costs many Billions to build those high speed wireless networks.

Maybe he should have said that, as a better example, when looking at these mountains of debt: banks "make a fortune"?

But again, this is a thread about photo theft, not profitability of certain industries.

Most of those debts are usually in the form of bonds, not bank loans.

(Investment banks, however, will make money on arranging the initial sale of those bonds.)

And interest payments are tax-deductible, so the government is in effect losing money.




« Last Edit: July 05, 2018, 22:19 by namussi »


namussi

« Reply #26 on: July 05, 2018, 23:13 »
+1

I called it out and used facts in my argument, not opinions.

No, you used things that you believe to be facts. They may or may not be facts.

« Reply #27 on: July 06, 2018, 07:12 »
0

I called it out and used facts in my argument, not opinions.

No, you used things that you believe to be facts. They may or may not be facts.

What I used is data publicly available, not opinions.

Bond or not, that is borrowed money. Maybe not all of it from banks, indeed (we could check how much exactly), but also from other entities who lent their capital to these companies.

Check the latest announcements: Sprint is desperately trying to be bought by T-Mobile, because they don't see another way out from their financial troubles.

The fact is that, either way, US wireless operators operate under an enormous pile of debt, being far from "making a fortune" these days, let alone making a fortune from photo stealing, as posted above.

That association is preposterous.
« Last Edit: July 06, 2018, 08:37 by Zero Talent »

namussi

« Reply #28 on: July 06, 2018, 09:15 »
+1

The fact is that, either way, US wireless operators operate under an enormous pile of debt, being far from "making a fortune" these days, let alone making a fortune from photo stealing, as posted above.

That association is preposterous.


Enormous piles of debt do not necessarily mean that you can't make a fortune.

If you need capital, then debt is often the cheapest way of getting it, because of the tax advantages. Much better than asking shareholders to stump up.

namussi

« Reply #29 on: July 06, 2018, 09:17 »
+1

I called it out and used facts in my argument, not opinions.

No, you used things that you believe to be facts. They may or may not be facts.

What I used is data publicly available, not opinions.


You believe that the data are correct.  I suspect you have no way of checking.

« Reply #30 on: July 06, 2018, 09:25 »
0
Wow, so much hate. Or jealousy. Let it go dude. He shared his opinion, something everyone here has a right to do. Why you gotta call him out on every single thing he says? It is just a discussion. If you dont understand what he means, or you just dont like what he says, why dont you put him on ignore. Geez.  ::)

"A fact is a statement that can be proven true or false. An opinion is an expression of a person's feelings that cannot be proven"

Everyone is free to express their emotions and opinions, indeed.

However, his statement is false or misleading (in the best case scenario).

I called it out and used facts in my argument, not opinions.

What is this, kindergarten, where we have to protect some kid's sensitivity and play along, even when proven wrong?

Jeez!

PS. The truth will set you free, but first it will piss you off.  :P


LOL. Not pissed off at all, but cute that you think you know me. You are right, the rest of us are stupid idiots. LOL. Buh bye.

« Reply #31 on: July 06, 2018, 09:44 »
0

The fact is that, either way, US wireless operators operate under an enormous pile of debt, being far from "making a fortune" these days, let alone making a fortune from photo stealing, as posted above.

That association is preposterous.


Enormous piles of debt do not necessarily mean that you can't make a fortune.

If you need capital, then debt is often the cheapest way of getting it, because of the tax advantages. Much better than asking shareholders to stump up.

Sure, the fact is that they are certainly not making a fortune NOW. They have many investments to do, like building those nation wide 5G networks.

They might, or might not, make a fortune, in the future. That's a gamble those investors have to make.

But again, they are not "making fortune" from stolen photos.
I hope you can agree with that.
That's the point of his post and the point of this thread.

« Reply #32 on: July 06, 2018, 10:36 »
+4
What a horrendous precedent to set. Anyone can now use any photo they want, and simply claim "I didn't know it was copyrighted," as a legitimate legal defense. I have no doubt people will be doing exactly that more often now, and citing this court case in their defense if they get sued.

« Reply #33 on: July 06, 2018, 10:44 »
0
Wow, so much hate. Or jealousy. Let it go dude. He shared his opinion, something everyone here has a right to do. Why you gotta call him out on every single thing he says? It is just a discussion. If you dont understand what he means, or you just dont like what he says, why dont you put him on ignore. Geez.  ::)

"A fact is a statement that can be proven true or false. An opinion is an expression of a person's feelings that cannot be proven"

Everyone is free to express their emotions and opinions, indeed.

However, his statement is false or misleading (in the best case scenario).

I called it out and used facts in my argument, not opinions.

What is this, kindergarten, where we have to protect some kid's sensitivity and play along, even when proven wrong?

Jeez!

PS. The truth will set you free, but first it will piss you off.  :P


LOL. Not pissed off at all, but cute that you think you know me. You are right, the rest of us are stupid idiots. LOL. Buh bye.

When did I say that? I just called out a false statement made by one person.
Sorry, but that's your "opinion" and your emotions speaking.

There are many smart people on this forum, people using facts to prove their arguments.
There are also people with very "interresting" opinions, like yourself! :P

Anyway, since your advice was to "brush up on our reading skills", I am still curious to understand your interpretation of the statement you defended so passionately.

« Reply #34 on: July 06, 2018, 10:49 »
+5
I hope this decision is appealed.

« Reply #35 on: July 06, 2018, 12:31 »
+1

The fact is that, either way, US wireless operators operate under an enormous pile of debt, being far from "making a fortune" these days, let alone making a fortune from photo stealing, as posted above.

That association is preposterous.


Enormous piles of debt do not necessarily mean that you can't make a fortune.

If you need capital, then debt is often the cheapest way of getting it, because of the tax advantages. Much better than asking shareholders to stump up.

The debt is generally there even if they have the capital to pay for it. Mostly for tax breaks but, also to ease temporary cash shortages. Even Apple leverages debt.

A good example is something with high seasonal sales ... think ToysRus or something. Just trickles of sales until the holiday season. The need to invest the cash is still there but, the other 9 months of the year still need paid as well. The cash cow walmart has significant amounts of debt.

ShadySue

« Reply #36 on: July 06, 2018, 17:10 »
+3
"A fact is a statement that can be proven true or false."[/i]
A fact is a statement which cannot be proven false with our current knowledge.

PaulieWalnuts

  • On the Wrong Side of the Business
« Reply #37 on: July 06, 2018, 18:12 »
+1
From infringement to mobile carriers to debating the definition of facts. Well played Rinder. Well played.
« Last Edit: July 06, 2018, 19:20 by PaulieWalnuts »

« Reply #38 on: July 06, 2018, 18:33 »
0
"A fact is a statement that can be proven true or false."[/i]
A fact is a statement which cannot be proven false with our current knowledge.

Are you sure you assigned the right word to your definition? Because what you described seems closer to:

miracle
ˈmirək(ə)l
noun
a surprising event that is not explicable by natural or scientific laws and is therefore considered to be the work of a divine agency.
« Last Edit: July 06, 2018, 18:36 by Zero Talent »

ShadySue

« Reply #39 on: July 06, 2018, 18:39 »
0
"A fact is a statement that can be proven true or false."[/i]
A fact is a statement which cannot be proven false with our current knowledge.

Are you sure you assigned the right word to your definition?
Yes indeed, first lesson in Philosophy of Science 1.

Also, when you get to my age (and much less) you know that many things which were taught to us as 'facts' are now known not to be, as knowledge has advanced.

« Reply #40 on: July 06, 2018, 19:24 »
0
"A fact is a statement that can be proven true or false."[/i]
A fact is a statement which cannot be proven false with our current knowledge.

Are you sure you assigned the right word to your definition?
Yes indeed, first lesson in Philosophy of Science 1.

Also, when you get to my age (and much less) you know that many things which were taught to us as 'facts' are now known not to be, as knowledge has advanced.

I understand!

In other words, as knowledge will advance, we will end up agreeing with rinderart about wireless carriers making a fortune from stolen photos.

« Reply #41 on: July 10, 2018, 10:55 »
0
I think that judgement is fair. Photo was found on flickr, with no option to buy, and they took it down as soon as photographer warned them.
It would cost them only a few dollars to buy the image, if they knew that's what needs to be done. Photographer would get his 25 cents for it.
I wonder why people put photos on flickr and similar "show only" sites and then cry if image "borrowed"?


ShadySue

« Reply #42 on: July 10, 2018, 11:44 »
+1
I wonder why people put photos on flickr and similar "show only" sites and then cry if image "borrowed"?
It's more than easy on Flickr to put "copyright - all rights reserved" as the default when you upload, in which case it is more than reasonable to complain if the image is then stolen, as that locks it from e.g. right-clicking, so someone has to make a bit more of an effort to get the image, even if it's just screendumping the page and cropping into the image - which clearly is 'malice aforethought' - they clearly can't say they "didn't know the image was copyrighted", and even more so if they remove or crop out the watermark.
I have no idea if the protagonist in the OP had done that, but it's pretty standard. Also able to watermark as big as you like.

Whereas genuinely-bought files have no watermarks, and often if I click on them, I get to a full-sized verson of the file, easily stealable, as the buyer hasn't even resized.
« Last Edit: July 10, 2018, 11:55 by ShadySue »

« Reply #43 on: July 10, 2018, 13:43 »
+13
I think that judgement is fair. Photo was found on flickr, with no option to buy, and they took it down as soon as photographer warned them.
It would cost them only a few dollars to buy the image, if they knew that's what needs to be done. Photographer would get his 25 cents for it.
I wonder why people put photos on flickr and similar "show only" sites and then cry if image "borrowed"?

Yeah, I went into a museum.  There wasn't pricing on anything, so I just took a painting.  I figured I'd give it back if they asked.

PaulieWalnuts

  • On the Wrong Side of the Business
« Reply #44 on: July 10, 2018, 20:51 »
+2
I wonder why people put photos on flickr and similar "show only" sites and then cry if image "borrowed"?

Uh well, because if the image is All Rights Reserved it's show-only. If it has one of the ridiculous Create Commons licenses then it may be okay to "borrow".

I wonder why people put cars in car shows and similar "show only" shows and then cry if car "borrowed"?

« Reply #45 on: July 10, 2018, 21:01 »
0
I wonder why people put photos on flickr and similar "show only" sites and then cry if image "borrowed"?

Uh well, because if the image is All Rights Reserved it's show-only. If it has one of the ridiculous Create Commons licenses then it may be okay to "borrow".

I wonder why people put cars in car shows and similar "show only" shows and then cry if car "borrowed"?

No need to wonder about car shows.
Let's wonder about any car on a public place. It should be OK to borrow cars parked on a street.

« Reply #46 on: July 11, 2018, 14:21 »
+3
moved back, spam reported to Leaf

« Reply #47 on: July 11, 2018, 16:24 »
+1
moved back, spam reported to Leaf


I did that as well.
« Last Edit: July 12, 2018, 12:14 by cathyslife »

« Reply #48 on: July 13, 2018, 14:12 »
+1
moved back, spam reported to Leaf


I did that as well.

I can understand why you thought it was spam as the original topic had gone into a ridiculous off topic debate. Usual kind of distraction to divert attention from the actualy subject or arguments. Start argiung semantics or definitions, side track and hijack.

« Reply #49 on: July 13, 2018, 14:25 »
+3
No, there were actual spam links in two posts.


 

Related Topics

  Subject / Started by Replies Last post
38 Replies
7957 Views
Last post June 28, 2011, 12:50
by cthoman
6 Replies
2754 Views
Last post March 24, 2013, 17:30
by Batman
9 Replies
3998 Views
Last post December 13, 2016, 19:14
by Sean Locke Photography
0 Replies
560 Views
Last post July 11, 2018, 06:34
by cathyslife
0 Replies
490 Views
Last post July 11, 2018, 06:35
by cathyslife

Sponsors

Microstock Poll Results

Sponsors