Re: Re: Oh, the stories I could tell you about backups
Fire the IT department
Or, you know, maybe give them the budget and man-hours that they need to do the job right (which is the most likely culprit when you have IT issues like this).
#1) This is a grey area. I don't think there's really been any cases of who owns the copyright on a work made by a non-person.
#2) In all these cases, the copyright would belong to the one who started the camera (or the one who directed it to be started in a work for hire situation).
No, taking a photo of something is not stealing from the public domain. Anyone else can still go out to take and publish all the monkey pictures they want. The copyright only exists for that particular photo and all its derivative works.
Yes,the creativity is intrinsic to the fixed expression. But that has nothing to do with the copyright--which applies from the moment that the work is fixed (pressing the shutter button--no creativity there). The creativity comes before the work is fixed. With a photo, lighting, setting, framing and camera settings--those are not copyrightable (but I guess you can get a patent for them now) and can be used by another to take a functionally identical picture with a separate copyright. The copyright is not on the creativity--but on the fixed expression (the actual photo taken).
The copyright goes to the person that set up the camera, or the one that paid for it to be done (work for hire). They set up the camera to take the picture (pushed the shutter button), no matter how delayed.
Nope, with photos the copyright goes to the person who pressed the shutter button. The amount of creativity used to take the photo is irrelevant--whoever pressed the shutter button owns the copyright. Of course, this case is in a grey area because the monkey who pressed the button is not a person who can own a copyright.
There's a big problem with that whole "setting up the environment" argument--too many entities can make that claim on any specific work. I wouldn't want Canon claiming copyright on photos taken with their cameras, or Adobe because their software was used to edit the final image.
Uh...I'm not sure why you're arguing about the cost of printing on Xerox printers. I highly doubt that Hachette is printing James Patterson's latest bestseller on a sheet-fed laser printer. I'm pretty sure they're still using the same roll-fed offset lithographic printers they've been using for decades--you know the ones that fill a building. And, yes 2 dollars a book sounds about right for a large publisher--Mill City Press will print a paperback for you for about $3.90 a book plus somewhere between $1700 and $10,000 one time fee for editing and proofreading.
Since Assassin's Creed: Unity is using the same engine as the previous game in the series (and I'm certain that Far Cry 4 is the same), the great majority of the assets probably already exist, or can be easily converted.
Depends on how you look at it. To those who love being in authority over others--questioning that authority is the most profane thing that one could do.
On the post: Justice Dept. Official: We Could Get Lois Lerner's Emails From Backups, But It's Too Hard So Naaaaaah
Re: Re: Oh, the stories I could tell you about backups
On the post: Student's Story About Shooting A Pet Dinosaur With A Gun Ends In Suspension, Arrest
On the post: Photographer Still Insisting He Holds Copyright On Photo By A Monkey, Hints At Possibly Suing Wikimedia
Re:
#2) In all these cases, the copyright would belong to the one who started the camera (or the one who directed it to be started in a work for hire situation).
No, taking a photo of something is not stealing from the public domain. Anyone else can still go out to take and publish all the monkey pictures they want. The copyright only exists for that particular photo and all its derivative works.
On the post: Photographer Still Insisting He Holds Copyright On Photo By A Monkey, Hints At Possibly Suing Wikimedia
Re: Re: Re: Re: Re:
On the post: Photographer Still Insisting He Holds Copyright On Photo By A Monkey, Hints At Possibly Suing Wikimedia
Re: Other kinds of shutters?
On the post: Photographer Still Insisting He Holds Copyright On Photo By A Monkey, Hints At Possibly Suing Wikimedia
Re: Re: Re:
On the post: Photographer Still Insisting He Holds Copyright On Photo By A Monkey, Hints At Possibly Suing Wikimedia
Re: Re: Re:
On the post: Photographer Still Insisting He Holds Copyright On Photo By A Monkey, Hints At Possibly Suing Wikimedia
Re:
On the post: Photographer Still Insisting He Holds Copyright On Photo By A Monkey, Hints At Possibly Suing Wikimedia
Re:
On the post: President Obama Claims CIA Torture Was Okay Because People Were Scared And The CIA Is A 'Tough Job'
Re: Re:
On the post: President Obama Claims CIA Torture Was Okay Because People Were Scared And The CIA Is A 'Tough Job'
Re:
On the post: ISP Sues Former Customer Over Reviews Claiming His Internet Speed Was Less Than A Third Of What Was Advertised
Re: Re: Maybe I should start complaining about CenturyLink
On the post: Internet Industry Hate Taken To Insane Levels: Ridiculous Proposals To 'Nationalize' Successful Internet Companies
Re: Re:
On the post: Amazon Offers Authors 100% Of Ebook Sales To Get Them To Recognize Its Fight With Hachette Isn't About Screwing Authors
Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re:
On the post: Fans Mad At Ubisoft For Nixing Female Characters In 2 Games; Ubisoft Mumbles Something About Cost
Re: Re:
On the post: No, A 'Supercomputer' Did NOT Pass The Turing Test For The First Time And Everyone Should Know Better
Re:
On the post: High School Principal Cancels Entire Reading Program To Stop Students From Reading Cory Doctorow's 'Little Brother'
On the post: Harmless High School Prank That Occurred Completely Off Campus Turned Over To School Police Officer
Re: Re: Re:
On the post: Harmless High School Prank That Occurred Completely Off Campus Turned Over To School Police Officer
Re:
On the post: Comcast Commercial Promotes Fast WiFi To Gamers... To Play Game With No Online Connection
Re: Re: Re:
Next >>