 |
|
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
On 22-12-2012 21:21, MichaelJF wrote:
>
> As you can imagine I haven't asked for your opinion without cause. The
> information came from the web-site of a german radio broadcast station. The
> seriousness of this special station is out of question completely (Hessischer
> Rundfunk 3). Yes it was about photographies but about the use with facebook,
> twitter and the like. Some law attornies seems to fine people who gave
> photographies of the three named objects (and some more I have forgotten) at
> facebook or twitter or the like (I must admit I have no idea of this services so
> far und didn't use them). So it seems to be not only with commercial uses.
> Unfortunatelly the official German radio stations have to delete their
> web-informations after a (short) while and so I have only found an evidence that
> it has existed at the 18th October this year with google today. That's the
> reason why I'm am a little bit cautious to model industry objects - or use free
> models of them. For example I would have liked to have Asimo in a scene hosting
> a tea ceremony but rejected the idea since I was not sure if Honda has a say in
> this.
I don't know, but this sounds to me as if some vulture lawyers are
trying out the concept and see where it gets them to get in buckets full
of money. While probably legal (you can always try, no? while there is
no precedence) it is totally immoral of course and tells more about the
said lawyers' professional moral standing than anything else.
Thomas
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
On 23/12/2012 8:08 AM, Thomas de Groot wrote:
>
> I don't know, but this sounds to me as if some vulture lawyers are
> trying out the concept and see where it gets them to get in buckets full
> of money. While probably legal (you can always try, no? while there is
> no precedence) it is totally immoral of course and tells more about the
> said lawyers' professional moral standing than anything else.
Lawyers or clients?
--
Regards
Stephen
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
MichaelJF <mi-### [at] t-online de> wrote:
> At the moment I'm modelling the isle of Teneriffa, Spain, with my contour-line
> to height_field idea I posted some weeks ago and I really hope God claims no
> copyright....
Well, if Nietzsche was right, that copyright has probably expired already.
--
- Warp
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
On 23-12-2012 11:31, Stephen wrote:
> On 23/12/2012 8:08 AM, Thomas de Groot wrote:
>>
>> I don't know, but this sounds to me as if some vulture lawyers are
>> trying out the concept and see where it gets them to get in buckets full
>> of money. While probably legal (you can always try, no? while there is
>> no precedence) it is totally immoral of course and tells more about the
>> said lawyers' professional moral standing than anything else.
>
>
> Lawyers or clients?
>
From clients I do not expect otherwise, but from lawyers it is
despicable. After all, they can refuse.
Thomas
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
On 23/12/2012 12:16 PM, Thomas de Groot wrote:
> From clients I do not expect otherwise, but from lawyers it is
> despicable. After all, they can refuse.
I was in the middle of writing a scholarly rebuff, so eloquent that you
would be forced to agree that sometimes circumstance prevails. But the
BSOD that struck me down, made me change my mind. (I can take a hint.)
They are both despicable.
--
Regards
Stephen
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
If you believe in the Christian God and take the bible literally than he has
stated his copyright with Exodus 20 4. But I will not interpret it such
literally.
I interpret it as a warning not to go too far with scientific modelling. If we
abort unborn childs due to an unwanted hair color, we have crossed the limit.
Best regards,
Michael
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
On 23-12-2012 20:28, MichaelJF wrote:
> If you believe in the Christian God and take the bible literally than he has
> stated his copyright with Exodus 20 4. But I will not interpret it such
> literally.
> I interpret it as a warning not to go too far with scientific modelling. If we
> abort unborn childs due to an unwanted hair color, we have crossed the limit.
Amen to that indeed.
Thomas
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
On 23-12-2012 18:26, Stephen wrote:
> On 23/12/2012 12:16 PM, Thomas de Groot wrote:
>> From clients I do not expect otherwise, but from lawyers it is
>> despicable. After all, they can refuse.
>
> I was in the middle of writing a scholarly rebuff, so eloquent that you
> would be forced to agree that sometimes circumstance prevails. But the
> BSOD that struck me down, made me change my mind. (I can take a hint.)
Even PCs have souls ;-)
>
> They are both despicable.
Oh yes indeed! And some are more despicable than others... [now, what
does that remind me of?] ;-)
Thomas
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
Thomas de Groot <tho### [at] degrootorg> wrote:
>
> I don't know, but this sounds to me as if some vulture lawyers are
> trying out the concept and see where it gets them to get in buckets full
> of money. While probably legal (you can always try, no? while there is
> no precedence) it is totally immoral of course and tells more about the
> said lawyers' professional moral standing than anything else.
>
> Thomas
The wikipedia solves the riddle with the named buildings and yes the Atomium at
Brussels was one of the objects, I had forgotten. Look for "Freedom of panorama"
in the English wikipedia.
For the practices of this vulture lawers look for the German (!) word
"Abmahnung" within the same source.
Sometimes an answer is closer at hand, as expected.
Best regards,
Michael
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
On 24-12-2012 9:08, MichaelJF wrote:
> The wikipedia solves the riddle with the named buildings and yes the Atomium at
> Brussels was one of the objects, I had forgotten. Look for "Freedom of panorama"
> in the English wikipedia.
>
> For the practices of this vulture lawers look for the German (!) word
> "Abmahnung" within the same source.
>
> Sometimes an answer is closer at hand, as expected.
Thanks indeed for the info. This is very comprehensive. While the basis
for the copyright use may be sound and understandable in "normal"
circumstances, including the "Abmahnung" on internet for the protection
of private interest (I think Stephen was hinting in that direction), it
seems to me that excesses are prone to happen as is shown by a couple of
examples cited in the source. I am afraid that often either greed is the
real motive behind some of the actions, or simply misunderstanding of
the rules to sheer and blind enforcement of authority in the case of
anti-terrorism. My confidence in humankind is not excessively large...
Thomas
PS I am afraid we are slowly drifting into the OT region now. However,
going back to POV-Ray, what about modelling of Eifel Tower or Atomium?
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
