You are viewing a single comment's thread from:
RE: Daily Photo Selection 📷 June 15th 2017
You can sing and dance all you want about curation in your channel but that does not supersede U.S. Copyright Law.
I am a lawyer. You should learn to read laws better.
Then you should know better. Please state the Statutes you think allows you to take other people copyrighted images and used them for a purpose of profit so I can show them to my Lawyer and the other photographers can do the same.
Laws aside you really think this is ethical... You do nothing but take peoples work and write some text which would doubtfully pass and an editorial (which still requires permission, but will allow exceptions for trademarks being in the images, etc) and they are making nothing and you $300 - $500 a post a day?
I'm working here and I don't have the time to teach you the obvious. But you should go to your Lawyer and let him explain it to you, he is paid for that.
People are being sued right now for taking other people's images and using them as content to monetize on their accounts. You're fronting and hiding behind a pseudo-name. You have no clue about the laws or what's going on right now.
The circuit courts will decided soon enough and establish legal precedence in this new internet age, but so far you can't do it.
Curation on the steemit platform is done with voting and you receive a payout from that. You can't steal other people content, you're a shit lawyer if you believe that and I know enough lawyers to know you're not one.
Thank you for your contribution to jurisprudence. Good luck to you.
Bollocks. You are violating copyright law in most countries of the world. Your being a lawyer is irrelevant.
Some photographers may like being mentioned in your trail, some may not, and some may like to get a cut of your profits, to each his own, and I'm fine with that.
Just don't say using other people's photos for profit without permission is perfectly OK. It isn't, and it is illegal in most countries.
First you should learn what illegal use is, if you want to talk about it. You should know what is explicite and implicite consent. Instead, you decide to attack. I'm sorry @ocrdu, your reaction is emotional and irrational.
It's Dutch law, which is very similar to most copyright law in other countries. Quite rational, in fact.
Can you cite it please?
Unauthorized use of the copyrighted work is also considered as an offense under the Copyright Act. It is an administrative offense for which a fine may be imposed on a legal or individual person.
You have to read full provisions, to know what is the definition of “unauthorized use” or you should not talk about that. This is not an “Unauthorized use”. Period.
Photo-trail, you can have photos of other authors on your HDD, that is fine.
But when you put them on the internet, attributing the author without their permission to use their photos does not give you any incentive to use them and make money out of them.
Do I have to put a whole copyright act from my country here for you to understand?
What about not to hide behind the trail account. If you are from the US the laws are even more harsh!
Thank you for your contribution to jurisprudence. Good luck to you.
Google is your friend, I'm not wont to do a lawyers work for him.
So you don't know the exact provision of law and telling a Lawyer that he is wrong and that he can't say he is a Lawyer? You should know better.
I didn't say I don't know the relevant articles of Dutch law, I just said I'am not going to look them up for you. Are you sure you are a lawyer?
If you knew the relevant articles of any Law, you would know what you're talking about. Are you sure you know what you're talking about? There is is no violation of any law here.
WOW...WOW....Why I did not see this text here ... interesting.... I want to see a final solution. I think that would be fair to you to share with us, then you can also continue to post.