|[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
Search Epson Archive
And there's nothing from stopping professional photographers from taking a photo of the tower at night, either. I'd be Damned if I'd pay anything to anybody to photograph a national monument! Not a dime! That's almost like Exxon claiming ownership of the sun and adding a $25 fee on your monthly utility bill. Jerry Pete MacKenzie wrote: > > Have followed this thread with interest and throw in this analogy as a > possible illustration of the insidious effects of the control of copyright > that companies are applying. > > The Eiffel Tower in Paris has long been a favourite subject for photography. > If you wish to photograph it commercially you are now limited to making > images during the day. The lights that illuminate it during the night were > recently replaced with a new and complex system of lighting and the company > that made and installed them jealously guards the rights to photograph the > effect that they create. As a tourist or amateur you can continue to make > night-time pictures of the tower but as a professional you are unlikely to > be given those rights. Of course there is nothing to stop you taking > commercial pictures of the tower at night - as long as the lights are turned > off. > > See any parallels with the software/profile debate? > > Pete MacKenzie > firstname.lastname@example.org > > > From: Robert L Krawitz <email@example.com> > > Reply-To: firstname.lastname@example.org > > Date: Wed, 12 Jun 2002 19:36:54 -0400 > > To: CDTobie@aol.com > > Cc: email@example.com > > Subject: Re: Epson 1280/ MIS Perpetual Color Ink > > > > From: CDTobie@aol.com > > Date: Wed, 12 Jun 2002 17:23:49 EDT > > > > The licensing rights to control distribution of the software and > > derivatives thereof. If you open most any profile, you will find a > > tag bearing a copyright notification. > > > > I guess I would wonder on what basis they claim copyright on data > > generated by the program. That would seem equivalent to a compiler > > vendor claiming copyright on the assembly language output of a > > compiler, which generally seems nonsensical (I haven't even heard of > > Microsoft trying to do that). > > > > I suppose that they might embed other copyrighted material in the > > profile. For example, parsers generated by Bison (the GNU equivalent > > of yacc, a common UNIX tool for generating parsers) do embed some > > other code verbatim (bison.simple and/or bison.hairy), and *that* part > > of the code is covered by the GPL, although the FSF grants a special > > exception for that file. However, if you were to elide that code from > > the generated parser, there would be no issue. Is it possible to > > separate the (presumably) fixed, copyrighted part of the profile from > > the rest of the data, and replace it with something else? > > > > -- > > Robert Krawitz <firstname.lastname@example.org> http://www.tiac.net/users/rlk/ > > > > Tall Clubs International -- http://www.tall.org/ or 1-888-IM-TALL-2 > > Member of the League for Programming Freedom -- mail email@example.com > > Project lead for Gimp Print/stp -- http://gimp-print.sourceforge.net > > > > "Linux doesn't dictate how I work, I dictate how Linux works." > > --Eric Crampton > > - > > Turn off HTML mail features. Keep quoted material short. Use accurate > > subject lines. http://www.leben.com/lists for list instructions. > > - > Turn off HTML mail features. Keep quoted material short. Use accurate > subject lines. http://www.leben.com/lists for list instructions. - Turn off HTML mail features. Keep quoted material short. Use accurate subject lines. http://www.leben.com/lists for list instructions.