isn't there a Bill before congress that will allow content companies to dev=
elop (and have pre-installed) technology to prevent the unauthorized use of=
content? yes, there are currently watermarks, scrambling technology, etc =
… but i heard that this new software would come imbedded on all new compu=
ters

maybe this new technology will eventually prevent even simple linking "with=
out written permission"?

I once thought that the internet was beyond the reach of corporate control =
and scumbag lawyers … but i was wrong. it seems that capitalism is even =
greater than the internet … afterall it gives thousands of people like Ma=
ry … a job. g_d bless capitalism.

man i hate being this negative … i need a joint … ooops … i meant lit=
hium/ritalin. (sorry, i keep forgetting that drugs are OK as long as the p=
rofits are going to corporate america)

david goldschmidt


—– Original Message —–
From: Curt Cloninger
To: Mary Walsh
Cc: list@rhizome.org ; ask@eff.org
Sent: Monday, July 15, 2002 12:56 PM
Subject: RHIZOME_RAW: Re: Unauthorized Use


Hi Mary,

The image in question does not reside on my machine. It resides here:
http://www.permkids.org/quilt.gif

I am merely linking to it. I don't know whether its creataor purchased th=
e rights to use the image or not. Neither do I have a record of its creator=
's email address.

The site on which the image resides ( http://www.permkids.org ) is a non-=
profit organization caring for Russian street children. My quilt project to=
which the image was submitted ( http://www.playdamage.org/quilt/ ) is a no=
n-profit internet art project.

I've sent a copy of this correspondence to the internet art discussion li=
st at http://www.rhizome.org to facilitate public dialogue. I've also sent =
a copy to the electronic frontier foundation ( http://www.eff.org ).

Please advise.

sincerely,
curt cloninger
http://www.lab404.com






Our records indicate that you are using an unlicensed image belonging t=
o Stone as represented by Getty Images, on

http://www.playdamage.org/nature/index.html . The image in question is =
BE9994-001 by photographer Tim Flach. Unless you can provide records provin=
g this image was purchased, you must cease and desist display of this and a=
ny other Getty brand imagery immediately or pay a licensing fee. Any future=
illegal uses of Getty Images artwork will result in an unauthorized use in=
voice. Thank you for your cooperation,

<<be9994-001.jpg>

Mary Walsh
License Compliance Specialist
Getty Images

122 South Michigan Avenue, Suite 900
Chicago IL, 60603
312-344-4223
312-341-9636 fax

www.gettyimages.com
mary.walsh@gettyimages.com



========================
==========================
=======
This email and its contents are confidential. If you
are not the intended recipient, please do not disclose
or use the information within this email or its
attachments. If you have received this email in error,
please delete it immediately. Thank you.
========================
==========================
=======


Attachment converted: TAD:be9994-001.jpg (JPEG/JVWR) (0000F1AE)

In a message dated 7/15/2002 9:40:31 PM Central Daylight Time,
dgoldsch@tampabay.rr.com writes:


> maybe this new technology will eventually prevent even simple linking
> "without written permission"?

Come and get me coppers.

Max Herman
www.geocities.com/genius-2000/NOWcartoons.html

++

In a message dated 7/15/2002 12:11:33 PM Central Daylight Time,
curt@lab404.com writes:


> Unless you can provide
> >records proving this image was purchased, you must cease and desist
> >display of this and any other Getty brand imagery immediately or pay
> >a licensing fee.

"Breakdown, takedown, shakedown,
Just about the time you're thinkin' it's all right;
Breakdown, takedown, you're busted."

–Bob Seger, Beverly Hills Cop Soundtrack, USA, circa mid-1980's

I love it!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

Max Herman
genius2000.net

++

Curt, et al.,

This seems absurd. Any 21st century internet/copyright lawyer worth three
cents would tell you that to link is not to "use" in the usual sense. The
fact that no profit or solicitation or false claim of authorship is being
made from linking to this image should make it a clear "Fair Use" case. Fair
Use covers non-profit public services including education and the arts
(slide lectures, for instance, or appropriation artworks a la Hans
Haacke. You are not selling coffee mugs for chrissakes) – however, you
aren't even really "using" the image – someone else has appropriated it
and you are linking to it. The real issue is whether their appropriation
is Fair Use. If it's appropriated as art and not to make a buck then it
very well may be just fine. But then again: remember the case of Jeff
Koons and those puppies? And what about more recently, the case against
Damien Hirst? But both of those artists were making a FORTUNE off their
appropriations. That's a red flag: it means the people sueing them saw a
good way to make a fast buck. I think they both settled out of court. I
would think the Getty has better things to do.

It's truly embarrassing that the Getty I-bank of all things is hassling
impoverished net artists over rather typical links usage –how incredibly
ignorant– when they should be protecting their stock photographers from
copyright fraud (royalties, royalties). Someone did not do their
homework. Or someone's supervisor did not do their homework, more likely.

Curt, try calling Volunteer Lawyers For the Arts and see if you can get
them to send you a clear citation of the United States Copyright "Fair
Use" clause. I wonder if it's been updated in terms of cyberlaw (it's an
old, tried and true clause). I'll bet anyway you fall squarely under it:
http://www.vlany.org/ (212) 319-ARTS ext.1

best regards, good luck. don't let yourself be bullied.
JG



On Tue, 16 Jul 2002, Curt Cloninger wrote:

> Mary,
>
> I'm not hosting the image on my site. I am merely calling it into my
> page from another site. I can only assume that the person who
> submitted the image did have the rights to use it. Is it encumbent
> upon me to provide licences for images to which I merely link?
>
> Respectfully,
> Curt Cloninger
> http://www.lab404.com
>
>
>
>
> >I don't know who was responsible for this link and image use but I
> >am kindly asking you to cooperate in removing the link as it appears
> >on your site with the image in question.
> >
> >Best Regards, Mary
> >
> >—–Original Message—–
> >From: Dermot Brannick [<mailto:dbrannic1@yahoo.com>mailto:dbrannic1@yahoo.com]
> >Sent: Tuesday, July 16, 2002 3:52 PM
> >To: Mary Walsh
> >Subject: Re: Unauthorized Use
> >
> >
> > Dear mary,
> >i don not own nor know who does the site which holds a
> >link to ours, this is the first time i have seen this
> >site which you sent me. We run permkids.org and have
> >no knowledge of the site which contains the link. I
> >suggest you contact them directly.
> >Yours
> >Perm director
> >Brannick
> >
> >__________________________________________________
> >Do You Yahoo!?
> >Everything you'll ever need on one web page
> >from News and Sport to Email and Music Charts
> ><http://uk.my.yahoo.com>http://uk.my.yahoo.com
> >
> >
> >=======================================================
> >This email and its contents are confidential. If you
> >are not the intended recipient, please do not disclose
> >or use the information within this email or its
> >attachments. If you have received this email in error,
> >please delete it immediately. Thank you.
> >=======================================================
>
> + i am not my favorite person
> -> Rhizome.org
> -> post: list@rhizome.org
> -> questions: info@rhizome.org
> -> subscribe/unsubscribe: http://rhizome.org/preferences/subscribe.rhiz
> -> give: http://rhizome.org/support
> +
> Subscribers to Rhizome are subject to the terms set out in the
> Membership Agreement available online at http://rhizome.org/info/29.php3
>

Here are some up to date definitions re: internet copyright, limits to
copyright, and fair use:

http://www.fplc.edu/tfield/copynet.htm
"Basic limits to copyright.
Although email messages and web pages may enjoy copyright protection,
rights are subject to several fundamental limits. For example, only
expression is protected, not facts or ideas. Also, later works that merely
happen to be very similar (or even identical) to earlier works do not
infringe if they were, in fact, independently created. Sources of general
information on those topics are listed below. […]"

and here:
ONLINE FAIR USE OF COPYRIGHTED MATERIAL: ISSUES AND CONCERNS by Gerard
Martin
http://www.eff.org/IP/fair_use_online.article

and here:
http://arl.cni.org/scomm/copyright/uses.html
"The fair use provision of the Copyright Act allows reproduction and other
uses of copyrighted works under certain conditions for purposes such as
criticism, comment, news reporting, teaching(including multiple copies for
classroom use), scholarship or research. Additional provisions of the law
allow uses specifically permitted by Congress to further educational and
library activities. The preservation and continuation of these balanced
rights in an electronic environment as well as in traditional formats are
essential to the free flow of information and to the development of an
information infrastructure that serves the public interest.

It follows that the benefits of the new technologies should flow to the
public as well as to copyright proprietors. As more information becomes
available only in electronic formats, the public's legitimate right to use
copyrighted material must be protected. In order for copyright to truly
serve its purpose of "promoting progress," the public's right of fair use
must continue in the electronic era, and these lawful uses of copyrighted
works must be allowed without individual transaction fees."

and here's a definitive quote from the above doc:

FAIR USE IN THE ELECTRONIC AGE:
SERVING THE PUBLIC INTEREST

The primary objective of copyright is not to reward the labor of authors,
but "[t]o promote the Progress of Science and useful Arts." To this end,
copyright assures authors the right to their original expression, but
encourages others to build freely upon the ideas and information conveyed
by a work. This result is neither unfair nor unfortunate. It is the means
by which copyright advances the progress of science and art.

– Justice Sandra Day O'Connor (Feist Publications, Inc. v. Rural
Telephone Service Co., 499 US 340, 349(1991)


yay.

JG


On Tue, 16 Jul 2002, Curt Cloninger wrote:

> Mary,
>
> No goods or services are being promoted.
> http://www.playdamage.org/quilt/ is a non-profit collaborative art
> project. Here are its details:
> http://www.playdamage.org/quilt/invite.html
>
> sincerely,
> curt
>
>
>
> >I understand that you are not hosting the image but any display of
> >the image without a proper license is illegal. From our terms and
> >conditions - Any use of the image without such a license from Getty
> >Images is unauthorized. A license is needed in order to receive
> >permission to reproduce or manipulate this image. I know that you
> >can only assume that the image was licensed but I am telling you
> >that it is not, therefore all displays, including yours, is
> >unauthorized. We have the right to contact the isp host to ask for
> >cooperation when they have even less involvement in the content -
> >Under Section 512© of the Copyright Act, known as the Digital
> >Millennium Copyright Act, upon notice of infringement, in order to
> >take advantage of limitation of liability, qualified Internet
> >Service Providers must expeditiously remove the infringing material.
> >From the photographers perspective, who has asked us to represent
> >and protect his work, his image is featured on your site and is
> >being used to promote a good or service. This type use requires a
> >license and a fee or is considered copyright infringement.
> >
> >—–Original Message—–
> >From: Curt Cloninger [<mailto:curt@lab404.com>mailto:curt@lab404.com]
> >Sent: Tuesday, July 16, 2002 4:48 PM
> >To: Mary Walsh
> >Cc: ask@eff.org; list@rhizome.org
> >Subject: Re: FW: Unauthorized Use
> >
> >
> >Mary,
> >
> >I'm not hosting the image on my site. I am merely calling it into my
> >page from another site. I can only assume that the person who
> >submitted the image did have the rights to use it. Is it encumbent
> >upon me to provide licences for images to which I merely link?
> >
> >Respectfully,
> >Curt Cloninger
> ><http://www.lab404.com>http://www.lab404.com
> >
> >
> >
> >
> > >I don't know who was responsible for this link and image use but I
> > >am kindly asking you to cooperate in removing the link as it appears
> > >on your site with the image in question.
> > >
> > >Best Regards, Mary
> > >
> > >—–Original Message—–
> > >From: Dermot Brannick
> >[<<mailto:dbrannic1@yahoo.com>mailto:dbrannic1@yahoo.com><mailto:dbran
> >nic1@yahoo.com>mailto:dbrannic1@yahoo.com]
> > >Sent: Tuesday, July 16, 2002 3:52 PM
> > >To: Mary Walsh
> > >Subject: Re: Unauthorized Use
> > >
> > >
> > > Dear mary,
> > >i don not own nor know who does the site which holds a
> > >link to ours, this is the first time i have seen this
> > >site which you sent me. We run permkids.org and have
> > >no knowledge of the site which contains the link. I
> > >suggest you contact them directly.
> > >Yours
> > >Perm director
> > >Brannick
> > >
> > >__________________________________________________
> > >Do You Yahoo!?
> > >Everything you'll ever need on one web page
> > >from News and Sport to Email and Music Charts
> > ><<http://uk.my.yahoo.com>http://uk.my.yahoo.com><http://uk.my.yahoo
> >.com>http://uk.my.yahoo.com
> > >
> > >
> > >=======================================================
> > >This email and its contents are confidential. If you
> > >are not the intended recipient, please do not disclose
> > >or use the information within this email or its
> > >attachments. If you have received this email in error,
> > >please delete it immediately. Thank you.
> > >=======================================================
> >
> >
> >=======================================================
> >This email and its contents are confidential. If you
> >are not the intended recipient, please do not disclose
> >or use the information within this email or its
> >attachments. If you have received this email in error,
> >please delete it immediately. Thank you.
> >=======================================================
>
> + i am not my favorite person
> -> Rhizome.org
> -> post: list@rhizome.org
> -> questions: info@rhizome.org
> -> subscribe/unsubscribe: http://rhizome.org/preferences/subscribe.rhiz
> -> give: http://rhizome.org/support
> +
> Subscribers to Rhizome are subject to the terms set out in the
> Membership Agreement available online at http://rhizome.org/info/29.php3
>

By the way Curt - to bypass all this negativity. I thought I would just say
that I've just had a good look at the site & it looks great.

marc

http://www.furtherfield.org



> Mary,
>
> I'm not hosting the image on my site. I am merely calling it into my
> page from another site. I can only assume that the person who
> submitted the image did have the rights to use it. Is it encumbent
> upon me to provide licences for images to which I merely link?
>
> Respectfully,
> Curt Cloninger
> http://www.lab404.com
>
>
>
>
> >I don't know who was responsible for this link and image use but I
> >am kindly asking you to cooperate in removing the link as it appears
> >on your site with the image in question.
> >
> >Best Regards, Mary
> >
> >—–Original Message—–
> >From: Dermot Brannick
[<mailto:dbrannic1@yahoo.com>mailto:dbrannic1@yahoo.com]
> >Sent: Tuesday, July 16, 2002 3:52 PM
> >To: Mary Walsh
> >Subject: Re: Unauthorized Use
> >
> >
> > Dear mary,
> >i don not own nor know who does the site which holds a
> >link to ours, this is the first time i have seen this
> >site which you sent me. We run permkids.org and have
> >no knowledge of the site which contains the link. I
> >suggest you contact them directly.
> >Yours
> >Perm director
> >Brannick
> >
> >__________________________________________________
> >Do You Yahoo!?
> >Everything you'll ever need on one web page
> >from News and Sport to Email and Music Charts
> ><http://uk.my.yahoo.com>http://uk.my.yahoo.com
> >
> >
> >=======================================================
> >This email and its contents are confidential. If you
> >are not the intended recipient, please do not disclose
> >or use the information within this email or its
> >attachments. If you have received this email in error,
> >please delete it immediately. Thank you.
> >=======================================================
>
> + i am not my favorite person
> -> Rhizome.org
> -> post: list@rhizome.org
> -> questions: info@rhizome.org
> -> subscribe/unsubscribe: http://rhizome.org/preferences/subscribe.rhiz
> -> give: http://rhizome.org/support
> +
> Subscribers to Rhizome are subject to the terms set out in the
> Membership Agreement available online at http://rhizome.org/info/29.php3
>

I was only exaggerating before, hopefully Joy is right and it's fair use,
under for example practices concerning citation and MLA and all. To my lay
knowledge. Isn't fair use the only reason to have an academy? Imagine one
without fair use. Tenure is even designed to allow and protect fair use from
government coercion. Imagine journalism without fair use. Dang old 1984.




In a message dated 7/16/2002 6:50:47 PM Central Daylight Time,
joyeria@walrus.com writes:


> I'll bet anyway you fall squarely under it:
> http://www.vlany.org/ (212) 319-ARTS ext.1
>
> best regards, good luck. don't let yourself be bullied.
> JG