On 1/1/07, geni <geniice(a)gmail.com> wrote:
Seems to lack a unified argument. First complains
about people
ignoring copyright and then complains about people not ignoring but
buying the rights cheaply.
For the most part folks on Dpreview were not impressed:
http://forums.dpreview.com/forums/readflat.asp?forum=1032&message=21449…
The author freely intermixed sever distinct phenomenon.
[snip]
It also appears to stick exlusively to US law which I
would argue is
something of an error
More like sticking exclusively to his misconceptions of copyright,
such as the idea that it exists to enable him to make a living in his
choice of professions. :)
On 1/1/07, David Gerard <dgerard(a)gmail.com> wrote:
I note that free-content is not quite mentioned. I am
somewhat pleased
that many photographers' sense of entitlement *is* mentioned.
[snip]
Sure, although it makes me wonder why the By and By-Sa 2.5 revision CC
licenses are so popular, since they don't demand attribution to the
photographer at all so long as the work has been submitted by someone
to a site whos terms of service designate someone else to receive
attribution...