>>>precisely - a print or a photocopy can reveal the origin of the item, and
these days of manufacturing 'events' to justify actions, any paper trail
could be used against someone.>>>
>>>here's a nice one for you - you make a print of a kid playing down the
beach for some parent and it turns up in some paedophiles collection -
guess what? At least under new laws here in Oz, you'd be guilty of child
sex offences!>>>
Are you talking about some form of computer manipulation of the image you made for some parent by the pedophile? I am confused, so please clarify if I missed your point. If it is an innocent photograph, what do you have to worry about? If the picture is not so innocent, you deserve what you get. If the pedophile took the image you made and manipulated it, this can be proven. You can be investigated, as can the pedophile. If the investigators simply want to hang you without investigation, your problem is not printer serial numbers and invisible yellow dots. It is your system of government. We do not suffer those problems in the US of A. I do not know where Oz is exactly, but I take it you do not live in the United States. In the US, if you are innocent, you will likely be cleared. And get a big time book deal.
>>>Bye-bye computer, printer, cameras. And you don't get them back even if
you're found not guilty - and you'll have to rights to own such things
stripped from you.>>>
Again, I am not sure where you live.
>>>Took a pic of a plane? A copy of a torn up print is found in the garbage..
the plane went down months later under suspicious circumstances -
'Gentlemen, we have a suspect!'>>>
What would you expect the officials to do for God’s sake? Are you suggesting you should not be investigated in some clues pointed to you? Give me a break.
>>>A photograph reveals it's self to have been printed by you, the building in
the shot has been the subject of numerous bomb threats.. black choppers are
on the way ;-)>>>
See my comment about the plane. The WTC was photographed by thousands of people and not much individual investigation of the average Joe. Unless other clues pointed their way.
>>>No seriously, the governments of the world are once again scared of their
citizenry and that's NEVER been a good thing. Laws are changing daily
curtailing liberties and the most tenuous evidence is being strung together
to build cases.. then laws being passed retrospectively to protect the
faults in the laws or to justify flawed decisions. It is of concern to me
and maybe others.>>>
>>>A nice example occurred here some time back - all measuring devices in Oz
are required to be calibrated and signed off by a government department
referred to as Weights and Measures. An individual who worked for this
department contested a speed camera ticket and queried when the camera had
last been checked. It hadn't - it had never been checked, and under the
law of the day the device could NOT be considered lawfully accurate. A few
weeks down the track we have a new law (retrospective of course) saying
that speed cameras are the ONE ITEM in Oz that measures something that does
not need to be calibrated. Nice.>>> Not so sure what that has to do with the thread. Lots of places have lots of rules about this and that and I doubt the maintenance is always perfect. Here in Utah, all radar guns must be calibrated and I doubt that always happens. The police are required by law to calibrate the device in the presence of the person getting the ticket.
>>>At least now those who criticise KNOW that your printer may be embedding
info in the print, if they'd rather, I could shut up next time I find
something like this and they can find it out themselves.>>>
As I said before, the thread scared people unnecessarily. The article on the web site said the printers could show our location. Absolutely false. If ALL printer manufacturers announced that EVERY model will embed information in the print, it would matter not one bloody hell to most of us who do not break the law. Those that do will find a hack or another way to deal with the dots.
>>>I still think it'd be a handy thing for photog's to be able to validate
their prints with embedded data. I had in the past toyed with various dyes
and the like trying to come up with something that revealed copyright
infringement - something that would identify a scan or copy if not
preventing such things. Photographers used to want such a method of IDing
or protecting their prints.. not the case anymore?>>>
I agree, we need to know if our work is used without permission. The same thing for articles and other stuff found on the web.
>>>There's a new law being proposed here in Oz at the moment, police are to
have the power to 'shoot to kill' any *suspected* terrorist who may be
running from them. We are not an armed country like the US, and police
shooting are rare, but this will mean the law will grant police the right
to kill people who are merely suspected of something - effectively they
would be lawful government executioners!>>> And you automatically assume police will start shooting people for sport? I seriously doubt that. But, again, I do not know where you live. If it does happen, you problem is not the police; it is those that voted for the law. Not to mention, the lack of morality of the PD. Bob …
Get more from the Web. FREE MSN Explorer download : http://explorer.msn.com
| 