moskow wrote: "That means the forces of Satan and the Electronic Recording Industry have won in advance. Let us shout the slogan of "for non commercial personal usage to promote freedom of speech" and storm this Bastille."
******************************
Why do you believe the copyright owner of a photograph should be FORCED to let YOU use it? They may not agree with what you say or they may agree or they may not even care. But, why should they have to let you use their images/art/creative efforts at all?
If you want to use the photos check with the owner and get permission.
PLEASE READ! Images are back, but with conditions
-
_Joseph
- _Emeritus
- Posts: 3517
- Joined: Sun May 16, 2010 11:00 pm
Re: PLEASE READ! Images are back, but with conditions
"This is how INGORNAT these fools are!" - darricktevenson
Bow your head and mutter, what in hell am I doing here?
infaymos wrote: "Peterson is the defacto king ping of the Mormon Apologetic world."
Bow your head and mutter, what in hell am I doing here?
infaymos wrote: "Peterson is the defacto king ping of the Mormon Apologetic world."
-
_Simon Belmont
Re: PLEASE READ! Images are back, but with conditions
If a photographer has put her or his images on the Internet without security precautions or watermarks, then she or he is implicitly giving permission for said photograph's free use.
The end.
Ban Joseph.
The end.
Ban Joseph.
-
_Buffalo
- _Emeritus
- Posts: 12064
- Joined: Tue Nov 09, 2010 10:33 pm
Re: PLEASE READ! Images are back, but with conditions
Simon Belmont wrote:If a photographer has put her or his images on the Internet without security precautions or watermarks, then she or he is implicitly giving permission for said photograph's free use.
The end.
Ban Joseph.
The sooner bant, the better
Parley P. Pratt wrote:We must lie to support brother Joseph, it is our duty to do so.
B.R. McConkie, © Intellectual Reserve wrote:There are those who say that revealed religion and organic evolution can be harmonized. This is both false and devilish.