Archived posting to the Leica Users Group, 2013/02/01

[Author Prev] [Author Next] [Thread Prev] [Thread Next] [Author Index] [Topic Index] [Home] [Search]

Subject: [Leica] simple intellectual property question
From: mark at rabinergroup.com (Mark Rabiner)
Date: Fri, 01 Feb 2013 23:58:27 -0500

I think Mark Zuckerberg can afford to put gas in his car to go see a movie
plus buy popcorn without stealing our precious property rights nor our
precious bodily fluids. The facebook think is doing well for him he has meat
on the table almost every single night and is a vegetarian. He has to give
it all to his dog who is starting to dip on the middle.
For him to have some pissed off photographer in the news red in the face
threatening to sue him is a thing I know he knows he can live without. In
other words bad PR. He's not going to create it for himself for a few lousy
extra bucks. 
Why kill the cash cow... Woof!
I have more than a few photographer friends who like me feel free to show
their work fairly extenevely on FB. And a few who only show their own face
in silhouette as the NSA is going to steel his precious bodily fluids as
they track his cell phone down the highway when he climbs out of his car how
can they do that if they don't know what he looks like?
Just cause your paranoid doesn't mean they're not going to kill you.
But they know if they do they have to not create a real embarrassing
situation so its they who are red in the face in the news.
There's no money a red face.


On 2/1/13 7:13 PM, "Ken Carney" <kcarney1 at cox.net> wrote:

> I started to post a link to a photo when I could never figure out how to 
> get
> a photo uploaded to Facebook without it looking really bad because of
> compression artifacts (there must be a way - Mark's photos always look
> great).  Then I read the license terms.  It brought to mind the scene in
> "Southpark" where Kyle checks the "accept" box on the license agreement
> without reading it, though I imagine LUG members would never view such a
> thing.
> 
> Ken
> 
> -----Original Message-----
> From: lug-bounces+kcarney1=cox.net at leica-users.org
> [mailto:lug-bounces+kcarney1=cox.net at leica-users.org] On Behalf Of Ric
> Carter
> Sent: Friday, February 01, 2013 5:46 PM
> To: Leica Users Group
> Subject: Re: [Leica] simple intellectual property question
> 
> well, facebook would be in a strange position posting your photos if you
> don't give them permission to do so.
> 
> interpretation  details are of course the rub
> 
> ric
> 
> 
> On Feb 1, 2013, at 6:43 PM, "Ken Carney" <kcarney1 at cox.net> wrote:
> 
>> I think another problem is that Facebook can apparently change the
>> terms at any time.
>> 
>> Ken
>> 
>> -----Original Message-----
>> From: lug-bounces+kcarney1=cox.net at leica-users.org
>> [mailto:lug-bounces+kcarney1=cox.net at leica-users.org] On Behalf Of
>> Tina Manley
>> Sent: Friday, February 01, 2013 5:08 PM
>> To: Leica Users Group
>> Subject: Re: [Leica] simple intellectual property question
>> 
>> My God!  Here are the terms which I swear have changed since the last
>> time I checked them:
>> 
>> "For content that is covered by intellectual property rights, like
>> photos and videos (IP content), you specifically give us the following
>> permission, subject to your privacy <http://www.facebook.com/privacy/>
>> and application settings <http://www.facebook.com/editapps.php>: you
>> grant us a non-exclusive, transferable, sub-licensable, royalty-free,
>> worldwide license to use any IP content that you post on or in
>> connection with Facebook (IP License). This IP License ends when you
>> delete your IP content or your account unless your content has been
>> shared with others, and they have not deleted it."
>> 
>> I am immediately deleting all of my photos on Facebook and will not
>> post any more.
>> 
>> Tina
>> 
>> On Fri, Feb 1, 2013 at 5:39 PM, Ken Carney <kcarney1 at cox.net> wrote:
>> 
>>> I think this is clear, but I would appreciate any corrections.  The
>>> Facebook terms of use state that for any IP content that I post, I
>>> retain ownership but grant a royalty-free sublicense.  From the
>>> definition of "content", it appears that if I post a link to one of
>>> my photos on Facebook, I have granted the sublicense for that image,
>>> the same as if I had uploaded the image to Facebook.  Correct?
>>> Thanks for any help.
>>> 
>>> 
>>> _______________________________________________
>>> Leica Users Group.
>>> See http://leica-users.org/mailman/listinfo/lug for more information
>>> 
>>> 
>> 
>> 
>> --
>> Tina Manley, ASMP
>> www.tinamanley.com
>> 
>> _______________________________________________
>> Leica Users Group.
>> See http://leica-users.org/mailman/listinfo/lug for more information
>> 
>> 
>> _______________________________________________
>> Leica Users Group.
>> See http://leica-users.org/mailman/listinfo/lug for more information
> 
> 
> _______________________________________________
> Leica Users Group.
> See http://leica-users.org/mailman/listinfo/lug for more information
> 
> 
> _______________________________________________
> Leica Users Group.
> See http://leica-users.org/mailman/listinfo/lug for more information




-- 
Mark William Rabiner
Photography
http://gallery.leica-users.org/v/lugalrabs/




Replies: Reply from jayanand at gmail.com (Jayanand Govindaraj) ([Leica] simple intellectual property question)
Reply from kcarney1 at cox.net (Ken Carney) ([Leica] simple intellectual property question)
In reply to: Message from kcarney1 at cox.net (Ken Carney) ([Leica] simple intellectual property question)