Archived posting to the Leica Users Group, 2000/03/24
[Author Prev] [Author Next] [Thread Prev] [Thread Next] [Author Index] [Topic Index] [Home] [Search]John Collier writes: |Which is exactly my point. For there* OWN LEGAL PROTECTION, they ask you to |give up copyright just to the FILE. Maybe I need to take a writing course as |I do not seem to be communicating that well on this thread. I don't think you are slipping, John. I don't think your are giving up anything in reality , though. I think it is more of a hold harmless clause for MSN. Let's couch this in slightly different terms. Let's say that I hire Mark Rabiner to take my portrait (with a Leica of course). I buy three prints from Mark. I take one of the prints and post to the MSN site. Have I given up copyright? No, I don't own the copyright. Mark owns the copyright. I cannot give up something that I do not own... that is to say, I cannot give MSN the copyright... only Mark can do that if he so chooses. Have I violated Mark's copyright by posting the portrait on MSN? I don't know. If I claimed authorship, I would imagine so (but show me damages). If I put it there so that Aunt Leonore or anyone else interested in looking at my portrait --- I would argue that this was fair use of the photographic print which I purchased --- which argument may or may not be accepted depending upon how the contract to buy the print was phrased. The point is that the internet is relatively anonymous. I really don't know if you are who you say you are and if you have any rights that can be transferred. I cannot image responsible person/corporation trying to use my (who?) photographs and opening the "can" of liabilities involved. It's analogous to being in the stock market...if you cannot sleep at night, get out....If you lay awake at night worrying about someone stealing your photographs on the internet, put them in an album and don't show them to anyone. William