To: "Willis Boyce" Subject: public photography From: Julius Date: Thu, 17 Oct 2002 02:44:08 +0200 > I'm well aware of what you can do with frames, but matters is the end > result, not the technical means that you employed. If it walks like a > stolen photo and looks like a stolen photo then it's a stolen photo. Again, that's where YOU are wrong. The web browser itself would be the thief in this discussion. I can either choose to open a separate URL in a separate window myself, or let the web site open this URL for me. I can recompile a browser so that it will SHOW me parts from YOUR site right in the middle of another URL, and I would NOT be violating any law. The browser is opening the webpage, because it is available. For the browser and/or the internet as a separate entity it makes no difference where the photographs come from. As I have mentioned; You totally miss the concept of the www (and the internet); it exists because of network-addressing, hence because hyper links and URLs are there, and it can exist only because of that. So, in essence, when you put a photograph online, be it within a webpage, or as a direct link to a .jpg, you make it part of that network and it belongs to that network, not to you. The www is not a library, not a museum, not a store, and it can in no way possibly be compared to anything on this planet because of its magnitude and possibilities. You are a dying breed when you try to uphold a justice system that only works for stores, musea and libraries, and you see the same thing happening in the music industry as we speak. When you put your music online, the www owns ALL rights to it, and you've lost yours. You can have the credits to a creation, have your name printed on the publication(s), be known for it, but posession of your creation is no longer something you can make decisions about; You gave it away the moment you uploaded it. Computers and hard drives (luckily) do not check for copyrighted material (just yet), and blatantly put it all on your hard drive. I found the photograph by Vanessa on MY hard drive, and guess what? *I* never put it there! I did not sign a form before it was put on my hard drive, I did not have to pay extra before it got there, and it wasn't even protected in any way to prevent that from happening. I know a good Romanian proverb; "An idiot throws a rock into a well and ten smart people have to do their best to get it out." (freely translated) In this case I'm one of the smart people, and you belong to the group of retards who still think the www is something other than what it actually is. I recommend you listen to 'Off The Hook' each week, or to the archived episodes, you might learn something; http://www.2600.com/offthehook/ You keep on trying to put me and everything I write in a bad light. "The madman that steals a photograph and doesn't care about copyrights." Woah, I'm sooo scared! You have no idea how much creative material of my own I've seen and heard being used by people other than myself because I had put it online. I never complained once. It's a compliment! And if you're talented enough, you don't even need a lawyer to 'protect' your copyrighted material, if you're any good the world will know who created the material. Even if I would have that huge ego you think I have, I'm totally in my right to have it, it comes from what I've done and achieved in my life. Either way, I'm used to dealing with your types, basically all I'm saying is that you should open your rigid mind to reality! Julius ---------------------------------------------------------------------- To: "Willis Boyce" Subject: Re: Stolen copyrighted photo From: Julius Date: Tue, 15 Oct 2002 02:15:12 +0200 Cc: , , According to Willis Boyce on Mon, 14 Oct 2002 15:40:46 -0400 it was like this: > Dear Sir or Madam: > > One of your customers, Julius B. Thyssen, has posted a stolen copyrighted > photo on his web site, which is hosted on one of your servers: > http://www.jult.net First; It is not one of Cistron's servers, it is MY OWN server, hosted at home, thank you very much. Cistron is not to be held responsible in any way for what I put online, they only provide me with a very reliable and blazing fast internet connection. Second: The photo is not, I repeat NOT 'a stolen copyrighted photo', I found it freely downloadable on your website, so hey, you must be hosting stolen photographs yourselves then, correct? > The photo is owned by Vanessa Damasio, and she originally posted it on my > web site, photoSIG: > > http://www3.photosig.com/viewphoto.php?id=355414 Let me get this straight; Everyone visiting your site, where you host stolen photographs, is suddenly stealing photographs from you ? You still don't get it, do you? It is quite easy for me to show the URL ( http://www3.photosig.com/viewphoto.php?id=355414 ) ON jult.net embedded in my page, within a frame while (you) the host and/or the copyright holder's name aren't visible. I simply work with the co-ordinates of your webpage, and only show those that hold the photograph, and make them show up in a frame on my website, and it will look EXACTLY the way it looks when I host the .jpg directly myself. Like I told you: You can't possibly tell me that I am 'stealing' your photographs, because they are ALREADY on the internet. You don't understand the concept of the hyperlink, pal. > Mr. Thyssen has been informed that he is not permitted to use the photo, > however he responded belligerently and indicated that he did not intend to > remove it because, in his opinion, everyone on the Internet steals photos. I never wrote I would 'not remove it', I wrote that I post new pictures there (be it jpg, png, gif) every other day, usually they illustrate what I write, or I write something about them. It's called 'blogging' these days. I simply call it a homepage with hyperlinks, it's something the internet can be used for. It seems to me you don't understand the concept of the hyperlink, or the internet as a whole for that matter. > I would appreciate it if you would respect the copyright of Vanessa Damasio > and remove her photo from Julius Thyssen's web site. I will remove it from my site whenever I see fit, it would have been tonight since I will update the 'log' in a moment, but I will keep it there for a while longer, just to annoy you ;-) And let's not forget; The reason I had posted it there was because I registered at your website (photoSIG.com) and I had written a very nice critique about Vanessa's photograph on your site. The critique was directed to miss Damásio, not to you (obviously). It was for that reason that clicking on the photo on my site would direct you to HER own page on photosig.com. I would guess she will only benefit from that, and I would very much like to read her opinion on the matter. If anything (and it's clear to us all that you are a person with some serious personal issues) my intentions were positive, especially towards Vanessa and her talent, but it seems to me you will never understand things of that nature. You've blatantly kicked me from your website, for one, without warning me in any way beforehand about what I might have done wrong. And since you are very much aware that you jumped to conclusions too soon, you now simply try some scare tactics on my internet provider (ab)using the terminology 'stolen copyrighted photo' to suit your needs. > Thank you, > Willis Boyce I wish you all the bad luck you can possibly have in the rest of your life, really, I'm so fed up with this type of arrogant useless bullshit. Go find yourselves a hobby. Try to make photographs the way Vanessa does, I wouldn't be surprised if you would never even be capable of coming close to that level. Oh and by the way, my name is not "Thyssen", it's "Thijssen". (I submitted under Thijssen, so you should know!) -- Julius https://jult.net ============================================================================================= To: Arnd Marijnissen Subject: Re: [ABUSE#04339] Stolen copyrighted photo From: Julius Date: Tue, 15 Oct 2002 12:16:07 +0200 Beste heer Marijnissen, U schreef; > Foto's die online staan kunnen/mogen niet door niet recht-hebbenden worden > (her)gebruikt op persoonlijke sites. Wetgeving hieromtrent is redelijk > eenduidig. De recht-hebbenden op deze foto hebben u verzocht zelf deze > foto offline te halen, wat u geweigerd heeft. Dat is dus pertinent NIET het geval, de rechthebbende in dezen is Vanessa Damásio, NIET de mensen van photosig.com ! Daarbij mag duidelijk zijn dat zij zelf geen enkel bezwaar heeft getoond in mijn richting voor het (tijdelijk) plaatsen van haar foto op mijn site. Sterker nog, ze was ermee gecomplimenteerd toen ik haar erop wees, waarbij zij toevoegde dat ze de kleurencombinatie samen met die van mijn site verrassend mooi vond. (dit alles vond plaats onder het toeziend oog van die sukkels van photosig.com, in hun forum aldaar) > Wij zullen hier dan ook niet met u over in discussie gaan maar willen u > verzoeken de foto in kwestie zo spoedig mogelijk offline te halen. > > Doet u dit niet dan kan Cistron besluiten om de foto offline te halen door > uw verbinding tijdelijk af te sluiten om zo verder ongerief te vermijden. Ik haal hem weg omdat ik mijn internetverbinding hard nodig heb voor werk, maar in geen geval omdat ik het met u eens ben! Eerlijk gezegd valt het me zelfs zwaar tegen van Cistron, dat zij zich als bedrijf schaart achter de laffe scare-tactics van een stel opgefokte idioten aan de overkant van de oceaan. U moet zich eens inlichten over wat er zich daar zoal voor rechtzaken afspelen die op dergelijke schandelijk onrechtmatige gronden worden gevoerd. > Ik hoop spoedig van u te horen in een reply op dit bericht waarin u > aangeeft wat uw beslissing is in deze. U bent zich bewust van het feit dat voor mij de technische mogelijkheid bestaat om betreffende foto in een frame op mijn site te laten verschijnen terwijl deze gehost wordt door de zogenaamd 'rechthebbenden', zonder dat de naam van de rechthebbende of hoster in beeld is ? Ik zal dat aantonen, en ben heel benieuwd wat u daarvan zult vinden, u kunt dan namelijk vast beginnen met de rechtzaken tegen google. > Verblijvende, > > -- > Cistron Abuse Desk Coordinator Met ietwat teleurgestelde groet, Julius