The accused can however always claim attempted fraud by the
photographer, EXIF data and digital watermarks are after just data, and
a clever hacker can, not necessarily will, edit a high quality jpeg to
contain the data showing production and ownership, and well done with
attention to detail will ever fool most if not all experts, especially
if there is a substantial sum of money to be had.
However this just looks like more of the Disney* syndrome, protecting
their own works from ever getting into the public domain, while mining
he public domain for new ideas. This works best if the public domain is
expanded to include everybody else' output...
*Substitute any large corporation here, I just use Disney as they were
instrumental in getting copyright extended to the ridiculous extremes of
today**, while producing most of their best output from public domain
sources.
**Good if you can afford lawyers and litigation, bad if you can't.
On 5/3/2013 8:23 PM, Mark Roberts wrote:
John Sessoms wrote:
From: Mark Roberts
John Sessoms wrote:
They don't have to "settle" with you. Under the law, all they have to do
is stop using your photo ... IF YOU CAN PROVE IT'S YOURS.
This is not true. If you've registered your copyright they are liable
for compensatory and statutory damages.
Seems like this legislation is aimed at changing that, at least for so
called "orphan" works.
Yes. It would establish in the UK what is already policy in the US.
But in this image-searchable-Internet age it's more difficult than
ever to prove that something is an orphan work: Removing the metadata
and watermark from one image isn't enough — you'd have to remove it
from every copy of the image everywhere on the web (even the original
photographer's web site).
--
There are two kinds of computer users those who've experienced a hard drive
failure, and those that will.
--
PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List
[email protected]
http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net
to UNSUBSCRIBE from the PDML, please visit the link directly above and follow
the directions.
