| Subject: Re: Pictures and messages from her Yahoo group here: |
Author:
anonymous
|
[
Next Thread |
Previous Thread |
Next Message |
Previous Message
]
Date Posted: 20:09:44 02/03/03 Mon
In reply to:
anonymous
's message, "Re: Pictures and messages from her Yahoo group here:" on 20:03:09 02/03/03 Mon
>>The picture of Sturm, Marleau, and a bleached hair
>>Hannan, has been widely passed around San Jose. It's
>>from training camp 97 or 98. I think I know who the
>>owner of that picture is, and if anyone wants, I can
>>see if I can find it.
>>
>>As for her having copyrighted the pictures, there
>>should be the legal mark on the picture if she was
>>smart, and second, if they aren't her pictures, can
>>she even copy right them?
>
>
>If, they aren't hers she CAN NOT copyright them. If,
>they are hers she is able to do so. Sometimes there
>is a mark on the picture itself but, if, she sized
>them down she may have taken the little sign off.
>Some pictures have the mark on the back of the
>picture. As long as she can verify they are
>copyrighted she can get someone into a WHOLE lot of
>trouble. That's why Davida needs to watch her back on
>this one. Copyright laws are a BITCH!!!
Just a heads up Davida!! Dont want you to get into any trouble over something this stupid. K
Copyright law is mostly civil law. If you violate copyright you would usually get sued, not be charged with a crime. "Innocent until proven guilty" is a principle of criminal law, as is "proof beyond a reasonable doubt." Sorry, but in copyright suits, these don't apply the same way or at all. It's mostly which side and set of evidence the judge or jury accepts or believes more, though the rules vary based on the type of infringement. In civil cases you can even be made to testify against your own interests.
[
Next Thread |
Previous Thread |
Next Message |
Previous Message
]
| |
Feedback: 