But its a hugely silly thing to care about. I really dont see anyone being actually sentimental about a top down generic shot of a plain black tape. We would all lawyer up though, and fake caring, because money. Without acting like a victim, its harder to milk the cash cow.
Now, should we care about this mans "plight?" Not if we have any sense - it's about money...we would have to be naive as an ignoramus to think hes actually hurt about his black tape picture.
And most of us..at least when polled..believe that copyright is defunct. So naturally, most people are happy when their creations gain visibility. They have to flip the switch on their brain to feign angst and victimhood so they can lawsuit up and get that money. We all would. But lets not kid ourselves if its about anything but the money. Because most of us are pretty copyleft, especially about things we created and thought no one would ever appreciate.
Silly?? Are some copyrights less important than others?
It is not "fake caring, because money." I had that happen to me. It is not fun. It is not milking the cash cow. If you no not value the intellectual property you create, or if you have some specific ideological reasons, put your work in the public domain or GPL it or any other source of copyleft.
If you do that, respect the rights to get offended of those who use their copyrights to make money
These pictures were just up on a blog..there were no legal or licensing disclaimers. Because like most of us, he never even thought anyone would value a plain picture of a tape used for demonstration instructional purposes. Netflix normally wouldnt pay licensing fees for something they could reproduce in 10 minutes flat. If they knew they had to pay the fee they would have just created their own or used stock images..etc. Some contractor or dumb employee did it...but now they are going to have to pay up. This guy just got really really lucky. I dont see the "plight" or anything that we are needed for..other than to read a curious happening about someone who got really really lucky on someone elses fuckup.
Why do you create such an argument when the article _explicitly states_:
"Given the prominent copyright notice printed in the footer on each page, I assert my moral right to copyright over this image."
Ignoring the difficulties I have with people shrugging this off as "meh", why would people comment that way without even reading the article in the first place?
It is not being lucky. It feels bad when it happens to you. It will not be a lot of money. It is just a lot of problem and the realization that some people use your work to make money without even paying the small fee you are charging, and it gives you a bad reputation as the person who sued xxx over a picture.
Now, should we care about this mans "plight?" Not if we have any sense - it's about money...we would have to be naive as an ignoramus to think hes actually hurt about his black tape picture.
And most of us..at least when polled..believe that copyright is defunct. So naturally, most people are happy when their creations gain visibility. They have to flip the switch on their brain to feign angst and victimhood so they can lawsuit up and get that money. We all would. But lets not kid ourselves if its about anything but the money. Because most of us are pretty copyleft, especially about things we created and thought no one would ever appreciate.