Ugly Hedgehog® - Photography Forum
TAKING, USING WITHOUT COMPENSATION.....DEATH OF PHOTOTOGRAPHY COPYRIGHTS
If you want to reply, then register here. Registration is free and your account is created instantly, so you can post right away.
Page: <<prev 1 2 3 4 5 next>>
Jun 19, 2019 06:18:43   #
editorsteve
 
My magazine is headquartered in Rosenberg, near Houston. Would we hire a graduate of the Bauer school of mgt, which stole the picture? Hell no. Not the ethics I'd want them to have been taught.

| Reply
Jun 19, 2019 06:45:40   #
edwdickinson
 
DeanS wrote:
Something is seriously wrong with this. I tried reading all 34 pages, but gave up and skipped to the end - to learn that Olive got screwed. Two probs here for me: the guy got screwed, and it should not take 34 pages of gibberish to perform the act.


What's the problem Dean? Never heard of foreplay?

| Reply
Jun 19, 2019 07:01:07   #
nikonbug (a regular here)
 
if the state had just paid the poor guy what the legal defense cost them, he probably would have been happy.

| Reply
Jun 19, 2019 07:14:28   #
cbabcock
 
robertjerl wrote:
Actually he wrote that as coming from a villain who is plotting how to take over the country and become a tyrant.
In his speech about how to accomplish that he said:
"The first thing we do, let's kill all the lawyers."


Thank you for correcting that common misconception, and common dig at lawyers.

| Reply
Jun 19, 2019 07:47:54   #
rmalarz (a regular here)
 
I tend, at least on first reading, to concur with my esteemed colleague Ralph Wallace.

Additionally, my equally esteemed colleague Robert Jerl used a rather well-known and oft-quoted, but misinterpreted, line from William Shakespeare but failed to include the entirety of the exchange. One would be advised to become familiar with the complete play "Henry the Sixth" and especially the characters of Dick the Butcher and Jack Cade.
https://www.enotes.com/shakespeare-quotes/lets-kill-all-lawyers
https://www.nytimes.com/1990/06/17/nyregion/l-kill-the-lawyers-a-line-misinterpreted-599990.html
--Bob
LEGALDR wrote:
I just noted a case which many of the hoggers may be interested in. It is out of the Texas Court of Appeals, 1st District. I have attached the courts opinion.

| Reply
Jun 19, 2019 08:21:14   #
phlash46 (a regular here)
 
TBerwick wrote:
I prefer to take it out of context. 😎🤣


Of course you would...

| Reply
Jun 19, 2019 08:24:25   #
Dalek
 
I have a photo of the Alamo, is that legal?

| Reply
Jun 19, 2019 08:28:03   #
brooklyn-camera I
 
I need Perry Mason to read this and let me know what it states. I read and have no idea...fell asleep around page 27. I think it means that a copyright means nothing in Texas? Is this correct?

| Reply
Jun 19, 2019 08:37:36   #
Vienna74
 
I agree with others that this case is a narrow result that in no way means "the death of photography copyrights." The problem this plaintiff faced was governmental immunity, which meant he could not sue for the loss of his copyright fee for the university's use of his photograph. Instead, his lawyers argued it was a 5th Amendment "taking," similar to the condemnation of land without payment of just compensation. However, he did not lose his copyright. It was not taken. He lost a fee. Against any other non-governmental violator of his copyright he could still sue for damages.

| Reply
Jun 19, 2019 09:36:19   #
Blurryeyed (a regular here)
 
rjaywallace wrote:
Respectfully, I don’t see how this narrow decision portends “the death of (all) photography copyrights”. Plaintiff filed a claim in a particular manner when he might have chosen other courses. Based on the nature of the claim, the Appeals court denied the claim, which at its most under the law would have only amounted to Plaintiff’s loss of a limited copyright fee(s). The Appeals court noted that the Plaintiff never at any time lost his right and/or ability to continue to pursue other copyright protections with regard to the subject photograph or other photographs. Generally speaking, nobody took all of Plaintiff’s rights away from him.
Respectfully, I don’t see how this narrow decision... (show quote)


I somewhat agree with your analysis, I did not finish reading the decision but I read enough to understand that one of primary issues the court considered is the state's immunity from tort, this decision does not extend out to the general public or commercial infringement.

| Reply
Jun 19, 2019 09:50:06   #
via the lens (a regular here)
 
LEGALDR wrote:
I just noted a case which many of the hoggers may be interested in. It is out of the Texas Court of Appeals, 1st District. I have attached the courts opinion.


This is a very specific case and ruling (I actually read the document) and the court simply found that what the government did, did not constitute a "taking." It is only about a government entity and if the property was "a taking" by the government entity and the court ruled it was not a "taking," (i.e., along the lines of taking private property by eminent domain). The court clearly stated it did not endorse what occurred. The owner of the property should have tried some other approach to compensation or justice. Your headline is inflammatory and incorrect.

| Reply
Jun 19, 2019 09:51:22   #
donrent
 
I have ALWAYS thought that once you published a picture the rights and ownership was gone.

| Reply
Jun 19, 2019 10:01:05   #
IDguy (a regular here)
 
Narrow applicability but shows Texas needs to change its laws to not authorize stealing from its citizens.

| Reply
Jun 19, 2019 10:14:09   #
JohnSwanda (a regular here)
 
donrent wrote:
I have ALWAYS thought that once you published a picture the rights and ownership was gone.


Then you've ALWAYS been wrong.

| Reply
Jun 19, 2019 10:53:01   #
burkphoto (a regular here)
 
rook2c4 wrote:
Skip over the reference sections in the document, and it's not that hard to understand. I'm not sure what you mean by legal gibberish - overall, the text is rather simple and straight forward.


While decipherable, this evokes the old adage, “If you can’t bedazzle them with brilliance, bedaffle them with bulls—t!”

| Reply
Page: <<prev 1 2 3 4 5 next>>
If you want to reply, then register here. Registration is free and your account is created instantly, so you can post right away.
UglyHedgehog.com - Forum
Copyright 2011-2019 Ugly Hedgehog, Inc.