Re: Copyright, an answer to revenge porn

[James Schenken <jds@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>]

Actually, sending an image to a web site is making a copy.  You can't make copies of and distribute copyrighted material even if there is no financial gain.

In the case in point, the image(s) were copyrighted but not registered so the lady wold have to prove actual damages caused by the distribution.  The emotional distress of the publication has no bearing in the calculation of damages.

In the case of the painting, if it is an original, you, the recipient, are not allowed to change it in any way even though you are the owner of the original.  Just one of the vagaries of the law.

On Nov 15, 2013, at 9:12 PM, visfxsup <visfxsup@xxxxxxxxx> wrote:

Huge grey area.   Your are talking about 3rd party display and in many cases it is not infrigment. Its nor the case here though where the photogrphes are the photogrpahers or gifts of the artist.    What if I took the pictures that she posed for and I then post them for diplay?  Moral? No.  Legal yes.    If you give me a painting you created I can diplay that gift how ever I like see in non profit manner as well.  In fact I can probably display it how ever I like as long as I dont make copies.  

Sent from my T-Mobile 4G LTE Device

-------- Original message --------
From: James Schenken <jds@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
Date: 11/15/2013 8:47 PM (GMT-05:00)
To: List for Photo/Imaging Educators - Professionals - Students <photoforum@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
Subject: Re: Copyright, an answer to revenge porn

Randy,

That doesn't make sense.  If I give you a book or video, for example, and you put a copy up on the internet not for financial gain, are you claiming no infringement has taken place?