On Thu, Aug 28, 2008 at 3:57 PM, Jim Johnson <bmwwxman@gmail.com> wrote:
> I got a buddy who specializes in NSA and CIA internet stuff. You'd be
> surprised to know what they can tell about you... ;-)
>
If you're being specifically monitored -- which for the really cool stuff --
it's required they've set up some equipment in your house/vicinity. Kinda
expensive to do for everybody out there. But, those steps are required if
they're not going to install stuff on your PC. For the slightly lesser cool
stuff -- they don't need to install jack on your PC -- but they're not going
to know keystrokes and copying/pasting without doing the first part, or
hacking into/examining my PC. I do this stuff for a living -- not PCs, but
IT Security. FUD = bad!
Anyone who puts an image on the web knows very well that someone else may
>> save it to their PC. There is virtually no way of taking something back,
>> once you stick it out there in cyberspace.
>
>
> True enough. It all really boils down to how comfortable one is about using
> other peoples intellectual property without paying for it. I hafta look in
> the mirror in the morning.
> Cheers!!
> Jim
>
>
As I said, you put a copy on your PC going to the site. Duplication is
result of the technology. Interesting writeup here:
http://www.ifla.org/documents/infopol/copyright/nort1.htm, also indicating
that, due to a copies non-commercial use, plausibly falling under the
fair-use clause.
So -- a copy of an image on a website which you store on your PC is not a
violation. The artist posted it, and by merely visiting the site, you have
downloaded it, so permission is implied by their act. This is far different
than, say, an MP3. If you find an MP3 on the web, and it is not on the
artist/labels site, and it's free, then sure, common sense kicks in and
grabbing a copy puts you on the most dubious legal footing.
The label that posts their MP3 for download charges for it, or offers it
free. It's determined by the source. A photographer who wants to protect
their IP offers low res/scaled down images for free, often watermarked, and
requires purchase of higher res/quality pictures, which are watermark free.
The photog that posted the picture, is already letting you look at it for
free, and letting you put it on your PC, for free. It is generally
recognized that the IP owner also has a responsibility to protect his IP.
Posting an image on the web that all can access, for free, isn't really
"protecting it".
I just don't see a need to spread guilt around on this subject. I look at
myself in the mirror each morning, too, though sometimes, the lights are
pretty dim.
Mike
_______________________________________________
Support Team.Net http://www.team.net/donate.html
http://www.team.net/archive
http://autox.team.net/mailman/listinfo/spridgets
|