Archived posting to the Leica Users Group, 2003/03/03
[Author Prev] [Author Next] [Thread Prev] [Thread Next] [Author Index] [Topic Index] [Home] [Search]Austin I only referred to the "loss of intellectual property" which is a legal, not ethical or financial term. We gotta get a lawyer to help us. What say you, Marc Small? I do assert that the article was a most egregious example of ass-kissing to Leica, but if I were getting free Leicas to use, I would probably do the same. Probably? I WOULD do the same. Austin, you would too! Let's be honest about this. Jerry Austin Franklin wrote: > Jerry, > > I believe monetary benefit is one of the things that is crucial to any > action for copyright violations. It doesn't mean whether there was or > wasn't, but it's really hard to fuss about someone causing you "harm" if you > can't substantiate any monetary damage. Harm because you don't like it, and > it upsets you, or it may get you in trouble with Leica doesn't usually > count. Malice may, but I doubt this was posted with malice. > > Austin > > > Austin > > > > I really don't give a damn if Putz made or lost any money on his > > worshipful article, but the term "intellectual property" has nothing > > to do with money. Does it? > > > > Jerry > > > > > > Austin Franklin wrote: > > > > > NOR did anyone else make any from it! > > > > > > Austin > > > > > > > Erwin was not deprived of income by that posting. > > > > > > > > Patrick > > > > > > > > > > > > --- Steven Alexander <alexpix@worldnet.att.net> wrote: > > > > > on 3/3/03 9:52 AM, Dennis Painter at > > > > > dennis@hale-pohaku.com wrote: > > > > > > > > > > > To me the posting of a copyrighted, private email > > > > > was a question of ethics, > > > > > > not whether someone was "bad". > > > > > > > > > > > > "Fascinating" seeing your posts on this as > > > > > compared to your posts when you > > > > > > see another ethical question that you call > > > > > "conflict of interest". It would > > > > > > seem our ethical beliefs differ but that is > > > > > understandable. > > > > > > > > > > > > As to Erwin Puts' writing as it is now posted on > > > > > his website his assessment > > > > > > can be discussed if you chose. > > > > > > > > > > > > Dennis > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > I make a large portion my income from the licensing > > > > > copyrighted photography > > > > > through photo stock agencies. The internet seems to > > > > > have different moral, > > > > > ethical or legal standards with regard to > > > > > copyrighted material be it photos, > > > > > printed material or software. I am always reluctant > > > > > to post photo here or > > > > > other places on the net because of the disregard for > > > > > this basic legal > > > > > protection. > > > > > Mr. Puts can say anything he wishes concerning this > > > > > NEW M camera; but the > > > > > unauthorized use of his material is flat out wrong. > > > > > > > > > > Go out and buy a MP and lock it in some safe place > > > > > to worship it or go out > > > > > and use your now outmoded M3-7 and make pictures but > > > > > please do not steal > > > > > someone else's work and post it. > > > > > > > > > > Rant of the week...just returned from Florida to > > > > > Boston's teen temperatures > > > > > and am not real happy. > > > > > > > > > > Happy snaps, > > > > > Steven Alexander > > -- > To unsubscribe, see http://mejac.palo-alto.ca.us/leica-users/unsub.html - -- To unsubscribe, see http://mejac.palo-alto.ca.us/leica-users/unsub.html