Re: Usenet photo galleries

Discussion in 'Digital Photography' started by Will Dockery, Jun 27, 2005.

  1. Will Dockery

    Will Dockery Guest

    Joy Twitcuntre wrote:
    > "Joy Yourcenar" <> wrote
    > >>> "Michael Cook" wrote
    > >>> > "Will Dockery" wrote in message
    > >>> > >
    > >>> > > You're not paying attention, as usual, my jeering little

    groupie-twit:
    > >>> > >
    > >>> > > As I wrote, JRS, these fat-n-ugly bimbos need no photo

    manipulation:
    > >>> > >
    > >>> > > rec.arts.poems group shot:
    > >>> > >snip
    > >>> > >
    > >>> > > Funny stuff *without* manipulation.
    > >>> > >
    > >>> > > Oh, the humanity!
    > >>> > >
    > >>> > that was sooo uncool
    > >>>
    > >>> And what /you/ do is cool? You opened the door for parody-as-personal
    > >>> attack, Cook, and JRS says that it's legal.

    > >
    > > They are not alone. The Supreme Court of the United States (which
    > > includes Southern states too) said that in Leibovitz v. Paramount

    >
    > the plaintiff argued...
    > ------
    > ... principally on the ground that the defendant's use was commercial and
    > therefore should receive little protection under the fair use defense.

    While
    > we agree that the commercial nature of Paramount's advertisement weighs
    > against it in the fair use balance, we nonetheless conclude that this

    advertisement
    > qualifies as a parody entitled to the fair use defense under the analysis

    set forth
    > by the Supreme Court in Campbell v. Acuff-Rose Music, Inc. , 510 U.S. 569

    (1994).
    > ----------
    >

    http://caselaw.lp.findlaw.com/scripts/getcase.pl?court=2nd&navby=case&no=977063&exact=1
    >
    > In all the Usenet stuff there is no commercial interest and largely no

    case.
    >
    > > Pictures Corp/ Specifically, they ruled that when a movie company used
    > > a photo of a naked pregnant woman and superimposed the head of actor
    > > Leslie Nielsen on it, the photo was a parody using similar lighting
    > > and body positioning of a famous photograph taken by Annie Leibovitz
    > > of the actress Demi Moore for the cover of Vanity Fair magazine.

    >
    > Public figures, yes. Plus they had permission for each individual photo.
    >
    > Liebowitz was sueing because of (intended simiarity) with her (famous)
    > photo.
    >
    > Paramount didn't rip-off the Liebowitz image. Only mimiced it using
    > legal photographs. That is what the case was about.


    Exactly. Michael cook didn't create a bit of his "parody" of Chuck and
    Bishop... he used photographs of their faces pasted onto images /stolen/
    from a porn website.

    > Didn't actually read it, dear?


    She admitted to being /bobble-brained/ this morning...

    > > Important factors: The movie company's use was transformative (because
    > > it imitated the photographer's style for comic effect or ridicule) and
    > > it was obvious the photo was an altered image,not an implied original,

    >
    > No. There was no photo theft.
    > Only imitation.


    Where in Cook's case, once again, photos were stolen from /three/ sources:
    Bishop, Chuck /and/ the gay porn website... unless Cook claims that /he/ was
    the photographer... which in that case /that/ concept of Cook the "swinging
    gay photographer" provide ample fodder for /counter parody/... dig that
    1970s disco cap in his picture:

    <http://www.kookbusters.org/Sprite_32.jpg>

    > It's purpose was not defamation of a private citizen using a stolen

    photograph.
    > Not very similar, really.


    A closer similarity would have been pasting Demi Moore's face on, say,
    Chuck's body.

    > > and thus did not damage Ms. Leibovitz (Leibovitz v. Paramount Pictures
    > > Corp., 137 F.3d 109 (2d Cir. N.Y. 1998).)

    >
    > Have anything similar to that on a private citizen, using stolen photos?
    > I've heard it is different.
    >
    > Wonder what Tom Bishop will do? He seems crazy.


    "Bugfuck crazy!" -Harlan Ellison

    > > .. and besides, i didn't even
    > >>> /steal/ anything, just posted a link to Joy's own website.

    > >
    > > You can't be this brain damaged. You KNOW the poem Tom intentionally
    > > and gleefully stole and butchered is the copyright theft I refer to.
    > > For your sake, I really hope this is a bad snip and Tom got cut off.

    >
    > Don't look now, but I think someone is parodying your porn/poetry site
    > methodically, and posting to Usenet, impersonating you.
    >
    > Mocking you.
    >
    > Karma, perhaps?
    >
    > Joy
    > Joy Twitcuntre
    > Mirthologies: www.revolvingbeauty.com/mirth
    > Porn site: www.revolvingbeauty.com/porn
    >
    > I am the roil of your rolls,
    > Everything else is lipid.
    > ~Fat Baby~


    The links don't work yet, Joy... looking forward to it, though.

    Will there be a /photo gallery/? *grin*

    --
    The Shadowville/Netherlands project:
    http://www.kannibaal.nl/shadowville.htm

    "Mirror Twins":
    http://www.lulu.com/items/29000/29085/preview/Will_Dockery_-_03_-_Track__3.mp3
    Will Dockery, Jun 27, 2005
    #1
    1. Advertising

Want to reply to this thread or ask your own question?

It takes just 2 minutes to sign up (and it's free!). Just click the sign up button to choose a username and then you can ask your own questions on the forum.
Similar Threads
  1. Will Dockery

    Re: Usenet photo galleries

    Will Dockery, Jun 26, 2005, in forum: Digital Photography
    Replies:
    0
    Views:
    724
    Will Dockery
    Jun 26, 2005
  2. Will Dockery

    Re: Usenet photo galleries

    Will Dockery, Jun 26, 2005, in forum: Digital Photography
    Replies:
    4
    Views:
    618
    Will Dockery
    Jun 27, 2005
  3. Will Dockery

    Re: Usenet photo galleries

    Will Dockery, Jun 26, 2005, in forum: Digital Photography
    Replies:
    2
    Views:
    828
    Will Dockery
    Jun 26, 2005
  4. Will Dockery

    Re: Usenet photo galleries

    Will Dockery, Jun 27, 2005, in forum: Digital Photography
    Replies:
    0
    Views:
    482
    Will Dockery
    Jun 27, 2005
  5. Will Dockery

    Re: Usenet photo galleries

    Will Dockery, Jun 27, 2005, in forum: Digital Photography
    Replies:
    12
    Views:
    736
    Barbara's Cat
    Jun 28, 2005
Loading...

Share This Page