Digital BW, The Print

On 5/6/02 12:34 PM, "Austin Franklin" <darkroom@...> wrote:

> Kevin,
> 
>> I can't believe you really believe this.
> 
> Now hold on, Kevin.  This is hardly a serious violation (if really at all)
> that you need to get all "puffed up" about here, and ESPECIALLY for you to
> make a direct claim of image theft is entirely inappropriate.
> 
Perhaps "image use" would be more appropriate.  As I said in another post it
is a hot button for me.
>> From this web page:
> 
> http://www.benedict.com/info/fairUse/fairUse.asp
> 
> "In determining whether the use made of a work in any particular case is a
> fair use the factors to be considered shall include -
> 
> 1) the purpose and character of the use, including whether such use is of a
> commercial nature or is for nonprofit educational purposes;
> 
> 2) the nature of the copyrighted work;
> 
> 3) the amount and substantiality of the portion used in relation to the
> copyrighted work as a whole; and
> 
> 4) the effect of the use upon the potential market for or value of the
> copyrighted work."
> 
> Obviously, 1) it is non-commercial in nature, 2) yes, it is copyrighted, 3)
> I would say this work stands on it's own as a copyrighted piece, and 4)
> pretty much zero, and not worth a note really...especially, since the person
> owns a copy of this work in the first place, and this could be considered
> the same as making a cassette compilation from a bunch of CDs that you own.
> 
> I, personally, see nothing wrong with making a copy of a work that I own (as
> in an image in a book, or a song on a CD) and scanning and printing it for
> display on my kitchen.
Agreed, this is arguably fair use.
> This is entirely different than borrowing or
> stealing a copy of a book and making a copy of it.
> 
> Obviously, taking someone's image that you just find on the web, and
> reproducing it for display, except as noted for fair use, is a copyright
> violation, and I believe is entirely different than the case here.
This is precisely the case here.  Seeking out the "...largest (pixel size)
and best..." image so as to reproduce it for display.

>Yes, I
> know that he didn't scan in the image from his book...but I do not believe
> that mitigates fair use in this case.
> 
As someone else noted copyright laws are complex and convoluted and no
'real' harm is done with making small copies (as opposed to big ones which
would compete with the original).  None the less, if you like someone elses
work enough to adorn your home with it, "I" believe you should pay for.
More, I think you should pay for it no matter what side of copyright you
land on.

> Austin
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Please visit the Group Homepage to check the Files, Bookmarks, Polls and other
> resources as they are often being updated. The page is at:
> 
> http://groups.yahoo.com/group/DigitalBlackandWhiteThePrint
> 
> Please follow these basic guidelines:
> - Include your full name with your message.
> - Include the address of your website, if you have one.
> - As threads develop, trim off excess portions of earlier messages to keep
> them short.
> - As the topic of a thread changes remember to change the subject header.
> - Good manners are required at all time. No personal attacks or "flames."
> - Complete your Yahoo profile.
> - Before posting a question, search the message archives and the various
> resources on the homepage.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/
> 
> 
>