wwp@yahoogroups.com:
Re: some research
John Riley 2008-May-27 06:57:00
On May 27, 2008, at 2:02 AM, Willy Kaemena wrote:
> Regarding their "non-commercial use" founded by the government and
> others
>
> somebody payed the scaffolding
> somebody payed the expensive projectors
> somebody payed the IR sensors
> somebody payed the computers
> somebody payed you name it....
> why we should give 2000 panoramas for free...
>
> Willy Kaemena
Willy, you read my mind! That is exactly the conversation I was
having with my wife earlier. We were saying that we bet they didn't
just walk into a shop and pick up projectors and computers and walk
out with them, saying "We are non-profit, academic, non-commercial,
etc."
Their tax or commercial status is irrelevant as far as copyright
infringement is concerned. In the U.S. there are people who visit
churches unannounced to see if they are using photocopied music. If
a church gets caught, the fines can be unbelievably large. It isn't
just hypothetical either; large fines are imposed regularly. I am
sure there are similar visitations to public performances by school
choirs, bands, orchestras, etc. I doesn't matter one tiny bit
whether the organization is for profit. At my university, we faculty
are regularly given the stern message that we can get the
university's ass in a sling by violating copyright.
No matter how well-intentioned the Globorama folks are, they really
should have known better than this. It is inexcusable and puts all
of the organizations involved into a serious liability situation. I
am not surprised one bit that they are trying to "make nice" without
admitting any fault. I am sure they have very strict instructions
from their lawyers on what to say.
I bet _somebody_ has found themselves in very deep sh*& over this.
John
John Riley
#removed#
#removed#
[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]