|
Not that I don't understand, I just find it interesting: distributing
mp3 files of a music album, or .avi files of a season of a particular
television series, reflects a loss of sales of a particular product
that does have measurable demand (though the demand is significantly
exaggerated because of the peer-to-peer means of exchange). Granted,
this was an AP image for which they hold copyright, and their case is
strong. However, I hardly see how this reflects a loss of revenue
considering people are not buying the original image (even though they
are, legally). The only money "lost" is that the artist did not pay for
rights to use the image. Wouldn't the AP's suit be reduced to what
their usage fee would be? Or would they usually have points on profits
as well? PhotoRoy6@xxxxxxx wrote:
|
