 |
|
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
Thomas de Groot <tho### [at] degroot org> wrote:
> 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...
One big problem with this whole issue is that many big companies are
claiming copyright on things that they do not really have a right to
(or even if they own the rights, they are trying to shut completely
fair use) and they are getting away with it, successfully.
The thing is, if a huge megacorporation sends a cease&desist demand to
an individual person, in 99.99% of cases that person will comply even
if he/she didn't have to, for the sole reason that they are too afraid
of legal action. Even if they would clearly win, going through a legal
process is very stressful (especially for someone who has zero experience
on that) and time-consuming. Worse still, there's always that tiny chance
that you will actually lose and have to pay big money to the corporation.
No sane person is going to take even that small risk just because of one
silly picture or video. Thus the big corporation gets away with it even
in cases where they would clearly lose the legal battle if it went that
far.
Basically, big corporations bully people into submission by spuriously
threatening legal action. And there's nothing that can be done about that,
and that's a big problem in today's world.
--
- Warp
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
On 24-12-2012 12:37, Warp wrote:
> One big problem with this whole issue is that many big companies are
> claiming copyright on things that they do not really have a right to
> (or even if they own the rights, they are trying to shut completely
> fair use) and they are getting away with it, successfully.
> [snip]
> Basically, big corporations bully people into submission by spuriously
> threatening legal action. And there's nothing that can be done about that,
> and that's a big problem in today's world.
Sadly, I have to agree fully with that.
Thomas
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
Thomas de Groot <tho### [at] degrootorg> wrote:
> 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?
Yes, from the beginning of this discussion I was not sure if it wouldn't have
been better placed into the OT section. As for the German wikipedia, where the
article about the freedom of panorama is a little bit longer than the English
version, modelling of the Eiffel Tower without the laser installation should be
possible, since the copyright is expired. The Atomium is copyrighted by SABAM,
an Belgian association of authors, publishers and other artists. This is stated
explicitely in the German wikipedia.
Best regards,
Michael
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
On 12/23/2012 11:58 PM, Thomas de Groot wrote:
> 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
>
>
And.. hair color is worse how than the very common practice in parts of
the world where they do that if its a girl? Yeah, most of us are likely
to see it as crossing a line. But, like with so much other such things,
I would bet my next paycheck that the first asshole using such a model
would be some Biblical literalist, who didn't want their kid to be left
handed, or something (because its like, of the devil, etc.)
Didn't I, a few posts back, also, point out that that whole part of the
Bible isn't even true, at all? Mind, not that a literalist would much
care, but seriously.. reality doesn't give a shit if you think something
happened that never did.
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
On 25-12-2012 4:21, Patrick Elliott wrote:
> And.. hair color is worse how than the very common practice in parts of
> the world where they do that if its a girl? Yeah, most of us are likely
> to see it as crossing a line. But, like with so much other such things,
> I would bet my next paycheck that the first asshole using such a model
> would be some Biblical literalist, who didn't want their kid to be left
> handed, or something (because its like, of the devil, etc.)
>
> Didn't I, a few posts back, also, point out that that whole part of the
> Bible isn't even true, at all? Mind, not that a literalist would much
> care, but seriously.. reality doesn't give a shit if you think something
> happened that never did.
At least they make nice stories :-)
Oh well, as long as people do not get fanatic about religious issues...
Thomas
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
On 25-12-2012 4:21, Patrick Elliott wrote:
> And.. hair color is worse how than the very common practice in parts of
> the world where they do that if its a girl? Yeah, most of us are likely
> to see it as crossing a line. But, like with so much other such things,
> I would bet my next paycheck that the first asshole using such a model
> would be some Biblical literalist, who didn't want their kid to be left
> handed, or something (because its like, of the devil, etc.)
I wouldn't have put it such explicitely but even an ultrasonic investigation can
yield "unwanted" results. I was more concerned about recent discussions here in
Germany about preimplantation genetic diagnosis. And yes I'm of the devil
myself, having my mouse at the left side of the keyboard...
>
> Didn't I, a few posts back, also, point out that that whole part of the
> Bible isn't even true, at all? Mind, not that a literalist would much
> care, but seriously.. reality doesn't give a shit if you think something
> happened that never did.
Sorry, I cannot follow all discussions here. But yes, the bible is a very old
tale and a lot of it cannot be true. But are we not reading fantasy novels? I
really prefer Raymond E. Feist.
But I think, we are getting really OT now and should use an new thread in the OT
section to discuss this issues.
Best regards,
Michael
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
> Sorry, I cannot follow all discussions here. But yes, the bible is a very old
> tale and a lot of it cannot be true. But are we not reading fantasy novels? I
> really prefer Raymond E. Feist.
>
> But I think, we are getting really OT now and should use an new thread in the OT
> section to discuss this issues.
>
> Best regards,
> Michael
>
>
When you read, and enjoy, some fantasy novel, you know it's fiction and
you wilignly suspend disbeleif to beter enjoy it.
When to many peoples read the bible, they tend to take the text as "The
Truth", even more thue than what they experience in dayly life, and tend
to treat those who don't beleive the same as, at best, fools, and at
worst, as some kind of criminaly perverted heretics. That's a big problem.
Alain
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
On 12/25/2012 10:39 AM, MichaelJF wrote:
> On 25-12-2012 4:21, Patrick Elliott wrote:
>> And.. hair color is worse how than the very common practice in parts of
>> the world where they do that if its a girl? Yeah, most of us are likely
>> to see it as crossing a line. But, like with so much other such things,
>> I would bet my next paycheck that the first asshole using such a model
>> would be some Biblical literalist, who didn't want their kid to be left
>> handed, or something (because its like, of the devil, etc.)
>
> I wouldn't have put it such explicitely but even an ultrasonic investigation can
> yield "unwanted" results. I was more concerned about recent discussions here in
> Germany about preimplantation genetic diagnosis. And yes I'm of the devil
> myself, having my mouse at the left side of the keyboard...
>
With every thing we come up with that can produce good results, we also
present the possibility of misuse. Knowing, from "pre-testing" that your
kid has a high risk of a heart problem means you know enough to look
for, and possibly repair it, for example. It also means that you could
just decide you don't want a kid with freckles.
Invariably, someone abuses things, and some societies decide to allow
it, some don't, and eventually, some sort of balance is reached. But,
its hardly different than someone drowning children, or leaving them out
in the cold ***while already alive***, based on the fact that they have
a birth mark, and someone's society thinks that birth marks are a sign
of evil, or some such. As a rule, we have, as a whole, abandoned such
nonsense. At least most of us anyway. Many that have not, find that the
rest won't let them continue such things. The real danger isn't that the
possibility exists, its that a society may rise to power, by what ever
means, that doesn't just make such things possible (along with a much
larger range of good things), but promotes some ideology that makes such
things "appropriate", such as the one, in much of Asia, which treats
female children as less desirable than males, and "does" sometimes,
whether its legal or not, to decide if they have a particular child.
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
On 12/25/2012 5:59 PM, Alain wrote:
>
>> Sorry, I cannot follow all discussions here. But yes, the bible is a
>> very old
>> tale and a lot of it cannot be true. But are we not reading fantasy
>> novels? I
>> really prefer Raymond E. Feist.
>>
>> But I think, we are getting really OT now and should use an new thread
>> in the OT
>> section to discuss this issues.
>>
>> Best regards,
>> Michael
>>
>>
> When you read, and enjoy, some fantasy novel, you know it's fiction and
> you wilignly suspend disbeleif to beter enjoy it.
>
> When to many peoples read the bible, they tend to take the text as "The
> Truth", even more thue than what they experience in dayly life, and tend
> to treat those who don't beleive the same as, at best, fools, and at
> worst, as some kind of criminaly perverted heretics. That's a big problem.
>
>
>
> Alain
Yep. Its fine if you can put the book down, and go back to reality. Its
not so good, if you read some bit of absolute fiction, and then, try to
apply it to the real world. Like, for example, Scientology, or Ayn Rand
libertarianism.
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
|
|
