Re: Image legality

["Tesla list" <tesla-at-pupman-dot-com>]

Original poster: "Jim Lux" <jimlux-at-earthlink-dot-net> 


----- Original Message -----
From: "Tesla list" <tesla-at-pupman-dot-com>
To: <tesla-at-pupman-dot-com>
Sent: Sunday, March 07, 2004 7:52 AM
Subject: Re: Image legality


 > Original poster: Terry Fritz <teslalist-at-twfpowerelectronics-dot-com>
 >
 > At 01:09 AM 3/7/2004, you wrote:
 > >Hey Chris,
 > >That Pic. looks familiar?Wasn't it posted to the list (Bucket Cap Wiring)
 > >feb. 20,2002 by Jaime? If I'm right,and he posted a picture on a temp.
 > >folder at hot-streamer-dot-com, then gave you permission to use it on
you're
 > >site, then are you saying you own the pic on hot-streamer to?
 > >Bill Mck.
 >
 > You Mean this one :o)))
 >
 > http://hot-streamer-dot-com/temp/Old2002Files/2002-02/cap.jpg
 >
 > Cheers,
 >
 >          Terry
 >


Hey folks.. the law's not always reasonable and understandable.  But, from
my rudimentary knowledge of IP law, gained mostly at the sharp end of the
stick,  the copyright holder can make zillions of copies of their work (or
authorize the same) without losing the right.  It's not like a patent where
you have to "vigorously enforce" your rights for all infringers.

However, this picture does bring up a whole "chain of custody" kind of
thing, since it doesn't have the Geek Group marks on it.  Doesn't make not
copyright (notice not being required since 1989), but does raise the
question of who the original author is, and who really holds the copyright
in the first place.

(Now you all know why IEEE, etc. always have all those long copyright
assignment forms, when you publish a paper.)